1. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff:

A. Machines such as the official branch court of the Daejeon District Court and the official branch court of the Daejeon District Court

1. Basic facts

A. On March 29, 191, H completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on March 29, 191, and the Plaintiff is a co-owner who completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to 2/13 shares among the instant real estate on October 21, 2016, due to inheritance on September 22, 1995.

B. As to the instant real estate, the Defendant C, E, and I completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “instant collateral mortgage”) that was completed on June 25, 1991 by the receipt of No. 11866 on the part of the Daejeon District Court, the debtor JJ, including the maximum debt amount of KRW 160,000,000,00, and the registration of creation of a superficies (hereinafter “the instant superficies”) completed on June 25, 1991 in order to prevent the reduction of the collateral value of the instant collateral mortgage.

C. Defendant B, C, and K completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “the second collateral mortgage”) completed on August 20, 1991 with the maximum debt amount of KRW 300,000,000 for the instant real estate, and the debtor J, for the establishment of a neighboring mortgage completed on August 20, 191.

K died on February 16, 199, on the other hand, Defendant E, his wife among the 2 collateral mortgages of this case, succeeded to 1/3 equity, F, G, and D, respectively, 2/9 equity shares.

[Grounds for recognition as to Defendant B and D: Each entry and the purport of the whole pleadings as to Defendant C, E, F, and G] (The grounds for recognition as to Defendant C, E, F, and G: deemed confession under Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The secured claims of the first and second secured claims of the Plaintiff’s assertion were fully repaid and extinguished.

Non-performance of Professor

Even if the secured claim of the first and second collateral of this case was extinguished by prescription.

Therefore, the Defendants should cancel all of the superficies established to prevent the reduction of security value of the first and second collateral mortgages of this case and the first collateral mortgages of this case.

(b) Defendant C, E, F, and.