1. The contract to establish a mortgage between the Defendant and C on November 1, 2017, which was concluded with regard to real estate stated in the separate sheet.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The defendant is C and 6 degrees.

B. On May 25, 2017, C acquired ownership by winning a successful bid on real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C seeking the payment of the acquisition amount (the Plaintiff’s claim for the agreed amount against the Defendant).

On August 17, 2017, Jinwon District Court rendered a judgment that "C shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated by the rate of 15% per annum from June 16, 2017 to the date of full payment (2017Da3365)," and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

C On November 1, 2017, the Defendant entered into a mortgage agreement on the instant real estate (hereinafter “mortgage agreement”) with the Defendant, and on the same day, the establishment registration of a mortgage (hereinafter “mortgage”) was completed with the Changwon District Court No. 22837, Nov. 1, 2017 and the maximum debt amount (hereinafter “mortgage establishment registration”).

E. The details of the property and debt held by C on November 1, 2017 are as follows. The value debt of the instant real estate KRW 164.5 million is KRW 132,00,000,000,000 in 18,2666,400,000,000 in Hadon-gun, Hadon (right mortgagee: H) G I (right mortgagee: H) KRW 7.5 million in KRW 2,50,000,000 (right mortgagee: Defendant) KRW 20,000,000,000 (based on recognition): the fact that there is no dispute; each statement of KRW 1 through 3 and 77 through 10 (including serial numbers) of the instant real estate; the fact-finding inquiry into the actual audience of this court; the purport of the entire arguments and arguments;

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts acknowledged earlier, the instant real estate can be deemed as the only property having real value as security C. Barring any special circumstance, C’s act of offering it as security to the Defendant becomes a fraudulent act causing the shortage of joint security in relation to the Plaintiff, who is another creditor of C, and the Defendant, who is the beneficiary, is the beneficiary of this case.