1. The defendant shall receive on July 23, 2001 from the registry office of the Gwangju District Court with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list from Nonparty A.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff (the former trade name: AEFA loan company) has a claim based on the final judgment of the Seoul Central District Court in respect of Nonparty A in the claim for the acquisition amount claim No. 2017Da8171 against Nonparty A.

B. The amount of claims against Nonparty A based on the above judgment is KRW 1,557,273,580 as of August 2, 2017.

C. The Defendant is a mortgagee who completed the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “instant collateral mortgage”) No. 41289, which was received on July 23, 2001 from the registry office of the Gwangju District Court on the real estate listed in the attached list No. 190, the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff, as a creditor of Nonparty A, seeks implementation of registration procedure for cancellation of registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case on the ground that the secured debt of this case was extinguished due to the expiration of extinctive prescription as a creditor of Nonparty A by exercising the subrogation right.

B. On this issue, the defendant asserts that it is not allowed to claim cancellation of mortgage by exercising creditor's subrogation right.

According to the purport of the entire pleadings, it is recognized that Nonparty A is insolvent. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff, a pecuniary claim against Nonparty A, is not legally allowed to seek the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the instant neighboring mortgage on behalf of Nonparty A is groundless.

C. According to the above facts, the secured claim of the instant right to collateral security was extinguished by the completion of extinctive prescription on July 23, 201 after ten years from July 23, 2001, on which the instant right to collateral security was established.

The plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.