1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On February 24, 2006 and July 8, 2008, with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”), the Plaintiff filed for cancellation of the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage with the debtor B and the mortgagee as the defendant as the defendant on the following grounds: (a) the registration of creation of a mortgage (hereinafter “each of the registration of this case”) was completed without authority pursuant to B; and (b) the Plaintiff, one of the documents required for each of the registration of this case, was issued with the Plaintiff’s certificate of establishment as his father’s father’s wife’s father’s son’s witness testimony, and the entire purport of each of the arguments, based on the following facts: (c) the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff’s certificate of establishment of a joint collateral security interest to B and its printing company F, which is the mortgagee of this case, and the Plaintiff and the parties concerned cannot be acknowledged directly as the parties concerned.

However, in cases where the registration of transfer of ownership is made by an act of disposal by a third party, not by the direct act of disposal of the former registration titleholder, but by an act of disposal involving a third party, if the former registration titleholder claims that the third party obtained the right of representation from the former registration titleholder or obtained the permission of the title truster, etc. with respect to the relevant real estate, the registration of the former registration titleholder shall be presumed to have been lawfully made. Therefore, the former registration titleholder seeking the cancellation of the registration on the ground that the above registration is null and void, that is, the latter registration titleholder did not object thereto

The burden of proving the invalidity of the former registration document, such as forging the registration document of the former registration titleholder (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da10386, Jun. 25, 2009) is imposed on the third party (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da10386, Jun. 25, 2009). Such a legal doctrine