1. The part concerning the claim for the confirmation of existence of an obligation among the lawsuits in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant shall enter the attached list in the plaintiff.

1. Indication of claims: It shall be as shown in attached Form; and

2. Applicable provisions of Acts: Article 208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act;

3. A lawsuit seeking partial dismissal is permissible when the Plaintiff’s right or legal status is in danger existing and obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute. As seen in this case, in order to seek confirmation that the Plaintiff did not have any obligation to be secured based on the mortgage contract, as well as seeking cancellation of the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage, the Plaintiff’s seeking cancellation of the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage on the ground that there is no obligation to be secured. Thus, it cannot be said that there is a benefit of confirmation to seek confirmation that there is no obligation to be secured based on the mortgage contract separately because the Plaintiff’s seeking confirmation of the cancellation

(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Da5640 delivered on April 11, 200). Therefore, the part of the lawsuit in this case’s claim for the confirmation of existence of the Plaintiff’s obligation is unlawful.