1. The part concerning the claim for the confirmation of existence of each of the instant lawsuits shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

Basic Facts

- The Plaintiff’s mother and C drafted a loan certificate between the Defendant and the Plaintiff to the effect that KRW 20,000,000 on July 19, 2016 will become due and payable on July 20, 2017, KRW 400,000 per month, and the payment date of interest on the 20th day of each month (hereinafter “instant one contract”).

- With respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant one real estate”), Suwon District Court rendered the registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff on May 27, 2016, as the receipt of No. 15867, May 27, 2016. However, the registration of the establishment of the ownership was completed on July 19, 2016 with the maximum debt amount of KRW 24,00,000,000, the debtor, the mortgagee, and the mortgagee, respectively.

- Around July 29, 2016, C drafted a certificate of borrowing between the Defendant and the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant two contracts”) to the effect that the Defendant lends KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff on July 31, 2017 due date for payment, KRW 200,000 per month, and the 30th day of each month due date for interest payment (hereinafter “instant two contracts”).

- With respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 list (hereinafter “instant two real estate”), the registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff was completed on July 25, 2016 by Suwon District Court, Sung-nam Branch Branching 39320, which was received on July 25, 2016. However, the registration of the establishment of the ownership was completed on July 29, 2016 with the maximum amount of debt No. 12,00,000 won received on July 29, 2016, and the Plaintiff and the mortgagee, respectively

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (which includes a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s mother, who asserted the purport of the entire pleadings, concluded two contracts or two contracts of this case where the Plaintiff was the debtor, without the Plaintiff’s consent, and the Plaintiff’s mother, who established a collateral security on the instant 1 and 2 real estate owned by the Plaintiff, and thus, the establishment registration of a collateral security on the instant 1 and 2 real estate is entirely null and void.

Therefore, there is no obligation of the Plaintiff under the instant 1 and 2 contracts against the Defendant, and the Defendant is the Plaintiff.