1. On March 15, 2012, the Defendant: (a) with respect to each real estate listed in the attached list to the Plaintiff, the Jeonju District Court Branch Branch Branch.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 15, 2012, the Plaintiff, as the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), was loaned KRW 17 million from the Defendant, and entered into a mortgage agreement with the Defendant on the instant real estate, and completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on the same day, including the maximum debt amount 22.1 million won, and the Plaintiff as the debtor.

(hereinafter “instant 1-mortgage contract” and “the instant 1-mortgage establishment registration”). B.

On February 25, 2013, the Plaintiff took out a loan of KRW 4 million from the Defendant, and concluded a mortgage contract with the Defendant on the instant real estate, and completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage on the same day with the maximum debt amount of KRW 5.2 million and the debtor on the same day.

(2) The registration of establishment of a mortgage contract of this case and the establishment of a mortgage of this case No. 1 and No. 2, and the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case No. 1 and No. 1 and No. 2 are registered (hereinafter “the instant mortgage contract”) and the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case.

On July 5, 2016, B, who is the Plaintiff, filed a petition for a trial to commence adult guardianship with the Plaintiff as the principal of the case with this court No. 2016-Ma516.

On November 11, 2016, the above court commenced adult guardianship for the plaintiff and decided to appoint C, who is the plaintiff, as an adult guardian, after having commissioned the plaintiff to conduct physical appraisal. The above judgment on commencement of adult guardianship became final and conclusive on November 29, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, Eul evidence 1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that each of the instant mortgage contracts was concluded with the Defendant even though the Plaintiff had no capacity to do so, as a legal act called the conclusion of each of the instant mortgage contracts. Since each of the instant mortgage contracts was concluded with the Plaintiff under the status of his/her own capacity, it is null and void.