1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The part concerning the claim for the suspension of the auction procedure among the lawsuits of this case.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 3, 2006, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 60,000,000 from the Defendant, a credit service provider, at an interest rate of 3% per month, and on July 3, 2007, the repayment period of which was set by the Plaintiff. To secure its return, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of the mortgage of this case, which was 90,000, for each of the instant real property owned by the Plaintiff, to the Defendant as a collateral for the return thereof.

B. On April 18, 2007, the Plaintiff paid KRW 22,000,000 to the Defendant with a partial payment of the loan as of July 3, 2006 (hereinafter “instant loan”).

C. On June 27, 2007, the Defendant, as an agent of the obligee and the Plaintiff, drafted a notarial deed stating that “The Defendant, on July 3, 2006, lent KRW 60,000,000 to the Plaintiff on July 3, 2006, at the interest rate of 36% per annum, interest rate of delay damages rate of 48% per annum, and due date of payment of July 3, 2007, and acceptance of compulsory execution in the event the Defendant did not perform its duty of return” (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

On July 16, 2007, the defendant prepared a receipt that he received KRW 15,500,000 to the plaintiff.

E. On January 5, 2009, the Daegu Livestock Industry Cooperatives, the Plaintiff’s other creditors, filed an application for voluntary auction against the Plaintiff’s Daegu-gu land and its ground buildings (Seoul-gu District Court D). In the auction procedure, the Defendant filed a demand for distribution on February 25, 2009 with the person holding the provisional attachment right to claim the instant loan claims, and received KRW 54,061,482 on the date of distribution on January 13, 2010.

F. Meanwhile, on October 1, 2009, the Defendant obtained a provisional attachment order as to the instant apartment 101 Dong-dong 901 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) owned by the Plaintiff with the claim against the instant loan claim, and the provisional attachment registration was completed pursuant to the Daegu District Court Order (Seoul District Court Order 2009Kadan12781, Oct. 1, 2009).

The plaintiff cancelled the attachment from the defendant.