1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff lent KRW 1,300,000 to Nonparty B from March 2008 to April 2, 200, and C jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation of the Plaintiff to Nonparty B.

C On April 13, 2009, issued and delivered to the Plaintiff a promissory note with the face value of KRW 300,000,000 and the due date of August 30, 2009.

Meanwhile, in order to secure C’s loan claims, the Defendant completed on September 16, 2002 the registration of the establishment of a mortgage consisting of the maximum debt amount of 616,00,000,000 as joint collateral, plus the maximum debt amount of 280,000,000, as well as the registration of the establishment of a mortgage consisting of 1,234,000,000 of the maximum debt amount of 27 February 2009, and the registration of the establishment of a mortgage consisting of 1,234,00,000 of the maximum debt amount of 390,000,000 on March 13, 209 (hereinafter referred to as “the registration of the establishment of a mortgage of this case”).

On October 6, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of provisional seizure on the instant real estate by taking the claim against C as the preserved right.

On August 18, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Suwon District Court for the payment of KRW 300,000,000 as joint and several surety deposit amount (201Gahap1883) and won the judgment. The judgment was finalized on September 20, 2011.

On October 27, 2011, the Plaintiff applied for a compulsory auction on the instant real estate.

Of the sales proceeds of KRW 2,419,524,30, the Defendant received dividends of KRW 16,917,760, totaling KRW 1,422,719,733 as the first-class collateral security interest and KRW 16,917,760 as the second-class collateral security interest, and KRW 1,422,719,79,733 as the second-class collateral security interest. The Plaintiff received only KRW 476,05,795 as the guaranteed claim amount from KRW 476,05,795 as the guaranteed claim amount from KRW 25,571,492.

[Grounds for recognition] The plaintiff's assertion as to the facts without dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and the ground of claim as a whole of the pleadings, although the defendant was fully paid the above loans from Eul, the registration of creation of a mortgage of this case is different from the above loans.