1. The defendant shall accept on November 19, 1997, the registration office of the Daegu District Court with respect to each real estate stated in the separate sheet to the plaintiff.

1. On March 30, 1996, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a commercial sales contract with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).

The Plaintiff agreed to pay to the Defendant the remainder KRW 160 million at the time of entering into a contract, at the same time as the contract is entered into, the remainder KRW 160 million.

However, after the Plaintiff agreed to pay the remainder to the Defendant within six months, the Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on each of the instant real estate in order to secure the remainder 70 million won, after having entered into a contract with the Defendant to pay the remainder to the Defendant at the time of occupancy in November 1997.

Accordingly, on November 19, 197, after completing the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the plaintiff with respect to each real estate of this case, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the same day by the maximum debt amount of KRW 90 million, the debtor, the plaintiff, and the creditor, respectively.

On April 14, 1998, the Plaintiff repaid the remainder of KRW 70 million to the Vice-Chairperson C of the Defendant’s Vice-Chairperson C.

[Grounds for recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the period of extinctive prescription expired after about 17 years from the date of establishment of the claim, even if the obligation for the sale price under the Plaintiff’s commercial building sales contract, which is the secured debt of each of the instant mortgages, was extinguished by repayment, or not, even if not,

Therefore, since there is no secured debt for the registration of establishment of each of the instant units, the Defendant is obligated to cancel the registration of establishment of each of the instant units to the Plaintiff.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted as reasonable.