1. As to real estate listed in the separate sheet to C:

A. Defendant A is the Suwon District Court Hanam Branch of the Sungwon District Court.

1. As to Defendant A

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

(b) Judgment on deemed confession: Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act;

2. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as to Defendant B’s evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the Plaintiff held against Defendant B the claim “17,204,663 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from July 20, 2013 to the date of full payment.” Meanwhile, Defendant C’s attachment acquired the ownership of real estate listed in the separate sheet on September 29, 1981; D’s death on May 15, 2012 and acquired 2/13 shares corresponding to the statutory share; however, Defendant B completed the registration of establishment of the collateral on February 14, 1994 with respect to the instant real estate by the Suwon District Court, Sungnam Branch Branch Branch of the Suwon Branch Branch of the Family Court, and the obligation to establish the collateral security was extinguished due to the expiration of the statute of limitations on February 13, 2014.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is an act of preserving common property on behalf of C, who is the co-owner of the instant real estate, and the Plaintiff is entitled to request the Defendant B to cancel the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on the ground of the completion of extinctive prescription, and the Defendant B is

[A creditor against a debtor may, to the extent necessary to preserve his/her claim, invoke the benefit of the completion of the extinctive prescription on behalf of the debtor (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Da17552, Mar. 27, 1991). As to this, Defendant B asserted that the debt between Defendant D and his/her property heir was suspended by approving the debt, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

The plaintiff's request is accepted.

3. citing the Plaintiff’s claim for conclusion