1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal, including the costs of supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is stated in the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance (as to whether the maturity of the judgment of the court of first instance and the validity of each pledge of this case are lost or not) except for a modification of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance (as to the expiration of maturity of the deposit account and the validity of each pledge of this case), and as such, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (as to the last day of the judgment of the court of

Among the judgment of the court of first instance, "special representative" and "appraisal" shall be referred to as "B" and " appraiser" respectively as " appraiser of the court of first instance."

The evidence No. 64 of the first instance judgment is added following the “60 evidence,” No. 7 of the 18th instance judgment.

The part of the first instance judgment Nos. 10, 6, and 7 of the first instance court’s “this judgment was maintained (for example, the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant on September 22, 2016, and the Plaintiff’s appeal (Seoul High Court 2016Na2067210) and the final appeal (Supreme Court 2017Da248308) were all dismissed, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.”

On September 22, 2016, the court rendered a judgment dismissing the plaintiff's claim against the defendant on September 22, 2016, and the plaintiff's appeal (Seoul High Court 2016Na2067241) was dismissed, and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

'in addition'.

2. The modified part;

5. Determination as to whether the maturity of the deposit account and the validity of each pledge in this case is lost

A. In full view of the overall purport of the evidence duly admitted, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(1) Upon maturity of the Plaintiff’s deposit (Account Number: KRW 2.5 billion, maturity of KRW 2.5 billion, and KRW 11, 2012; hereinafter “first previous deposit”) created the instant pledge right, the Defendant made the previous deposit on May 11, 2012.