1. The Defendants, on July 2, 1985, shall provide the Plaintiff with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 29, 1985, the Plaintiff borrowed money from Nonparty K, and set up on July 2, 1985, the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) with respect to the portion owned by the Plaintiff out of the real estate indicated in the attached list, with the maximum debt amount of KRW 3,500,000 on July 2, 1985.

B. The non-party K died on April 29, 200, and his heir is the Defendants.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the secured debt of this case was fully repaid and that the secured debt of this case was extinguished by prescription. 2) The Defendants asserted that the secured debt of this case was not repaid by the Plaintiff.

3. 1) The plaintiff's assertion is without merit, since there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff paid the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security to the non-party K or the defendants. 2) The extinctive prescription period of the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security is ten years in full view of the facts acknowledged before the judgment on the conjunctive claim. The secured debt of the instant right to collateral security of this case is a loan claim for which the due date has not been determined. Thus, the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security of this case can be exercised at least on July 2, 1985, which is the date of the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

Since it is apparent that the instant lawsuit was filed on June 9, 2017, which was ten years after the lapse of ten years from the instant lawsuit, the claim secured by the right to collateral of this case had already expired by prescription before the instant lawsuit was filed.

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage of this case to the Plaintiff.

4. The plaintiff's claim is justified and acceptable.