1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On September 30, 2010, the Plaintiff Company completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the sale on September 15, 2010 with respect to C forest land 60902 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). On the same day, the Plaintiff Company completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to C forest land 60902 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). On the same day, the Plaintiff Company completed the registration of ownership transfer with the maximum debt amount KRW 20 million

(hereinafter the above right to collateral security is referred to as D’s registered collateral security).

D On May 11, 2015, a decision to commence voluntary auction based on the above-mortgage was made on May 11, 2015, and on August 25, 2015, the sale procedure was revoked.

On the other hand, the registration of D's right to collateral security was cancelled on August 24, 2015.

C. On August 25, 2015, Plaintiff Company completed the registration of creation of a mortgage with the maximum debt amount of KRW 210 million, the Plaintiff Company, and the mortgagee as the Defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as the above collateral security in the name of the defendant). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence No. 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the right to collateral security under the name of the Defendant does not exist, and that the Plaintiff Company created the Defendant without the consent of the shareholders, and thus the registration must be cancelled.

3. Determination

A. As to the assertion that there is no secured claim, a mortgage is established by setting only the maximum amount of the secured claim and reserving the determination of the obligation in the future (Article 357(1) of the Civil Act), and is established for the purpose of securing a certain limit in a settlement term for the future several unspecified claims arising from a continuous business relationship. As such, there is a legal act establishing a secured claim of the right to collateral separate from the act of establishing the right to collateral. The burden of proof as to whether there was a legal act establishing the secured claim of the right to collateral at the time of the establishment of the right to collateral has been asserted

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da72070, Dec. 24, 2009). In light of the above legal doctrine, it is reasonable to view the aforementioned legal doctrine.