1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant C Co., Ltd. shall be the Jeonju District Court with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list.

1. The indication of the claim is as shown in the annexed sheet of claim.

2. Grounds for recognition;

(a) The Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation established by Defendant C Co., Ltd. and D Bankruptcy Trustee: A judgment made by deeming confession (Articles 208(3)2 and 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

B. Defendant Republic of Korea: (a) comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleading in the statement No. 1, it was acknowledged that E, the former owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, made a mortgage contract with the above company on February 17, 2001 in order to secure the obligation for the payment of goods to Defendant C Co., Ltd.; and (b) completed the establishment of a mortgage on February 19, 2001 (hereinafter “instant mortgage”) prior to the registration date, and it is apparent that ten years have elapsed since the date of the registration, the secured obligation of the instant mortgage became extinct after the expiration of the extinctive prescription.

Therefore, Defendant C Co., Ltd. is obligated to perform the procedure for cancellation registration of the instant collateral security right to the Plaintiff, the owner of real estate listed in the attached Table, due to the termination of the secured obligation due to the nature of the collateral

In addition, the defendant Republic of Korea is a third party who has an interest in the registration concerning the cancellation of the right to collateral security of this case by seizing the secured claim of this case and completing the seizure registration with the above defendant as a creditor.

In addition, the above defendant, who is merely the position of seizing the secured claim of the right to collateral, cannot be deemed to have a right to oppose the plaintiff seeking the cancellation of the right to collateral of this case by claiming the extinctive prescription of the secured claim. Thus, the defendant has a duty to express his/her consent on the registration of cancellation of the right to collateral

Although Defendant Republic of Korea asserts that the Plaintiff has to prove the absence of the grounds for interruption of extinctive prescription, the fact that there is a ground for interruption of extinctive prescription should be proved by the obligee asserting it.