1. The defendant shall D

(a) Attached List A.

Gwangju District Court Decision 200 October 26, 2005

1. Basic facts

A. The payment order against D was finalized, stating that “D shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 53,317,566 and delay damages therefrom,” by filing an application for payment order with the Gwangju District Court 2015 tea7,7483.

B. The defendant shall set up a separate list owned by D.

On October 26, 2005, the establishment of a mortgage agreement with D as to the real estate stated in the Paragraph (1) was concluded and the establishment of a mortgage agreement was completed on October 26, 2005 with the Gwangju District Court No. 43640, Oct. 26, 2005 (hereinafter “instant 1-mortgage”), and the list attached to D is set out.

On January 13, 2006, the establishment registration of a mortgage (hereinafter “instant 2-mortgage”) was completed as of January 13, 2006 by the Gwangju District Court No. 1697, which was received on January 13, 2006, by entering into a mortgage agreement with D as to the real estate stated in the port as the grounds for registration.

C. D does not have any property other than each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and is insolvent as a debt excess.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 4-4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the issue

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The secured claims of the instant 1-mortgage and the instant 2-mortgage (hereinafter “instant 2-mortgage”) have expired ten years after the date of occurrence or registration of creation of the instant 1-mortgage and the instant 2-mortgage (hereinafter “instant 2-mortgage”). As such, the registration of creation of the instant 1-mortgage should be cancelled.

The plaintiff, as a creditor of D, seeks cancellation by subrogation of D.

(2) The Defendant’s assertion D had paid part of the secured debt of each of the instant mortgages to the Defendant from the date of completion of the establishment registration of each of the instant mortgages to the date of 2018, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the extinctive prescription of each of the instant secured claims has expired.

B. The judgment of the defendant, D, each of the instant cases.