1. Nonparty B:

A. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet, Defendant A shall be liable for the Cheongju District Court’s Chungcheong Branch on December 12, 1996.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Cheongju District Court 2005Gau16895 against Cheongju District Court 2005 against Cheongju District Court 2005Na16895 and sentenced that "foreign B shall pay to the plaintiff 21,045,816 won and 8,579,569 won with 22% interest per annum from February 1, 2003 to the date of full payment." The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On December 11, 1996, Defendant A established the right to collateral security of KRW 19,50,000 for each immovable property indicated in the separate sheet, which is owned by B, as the receipt of the maximum debt amount under Article 44910.

hereinafter referred to as the "mortgage of this case" is the "mortgage of this case

C. Defendant Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd.”).

) On October 6, 2009, upon receipt of an order of seizure on the instant mortgage claim (Cheongju District Court Decision 2009 Taz. 1738). [Evidence No. 1, No. 2-1, and No. 2-2 of the grounds for recognition, and the purport of the entire pleadings]

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The instant mortgage does not exist, or the establishment of a mortgage is null and void of the cause of the establishment of a mortgage, and even if the secured claim exists, extinctive prescription expired.

B. Therefore, Defendant A is obligated to perform the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a mortgage of this case to Nonparty B, and Defendant Seoul Guarantee Insurance is obligated to express its consent to the cancellation of a mortgage as a third party who has an interest in the registry of this case with respect to the mortgage of this case.

3. Determination

A. According to the facts of the above recognition as to the claim against Defendant A, the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security expired after the lapse of ten years from the date of creation of the right to collateral security.

(No determination is made on the plaintiff's other selective argument). Accordingly, the defendant A is obligated to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of the registration of cancellation of the establishment of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage of this case.

B. Where a claim with a right to collateral security regarding the claim against the defendant Seoul Guarantee Insurance is provisionally seized;