1. The defendant completed with B (C) No. 5502 of the receipt of March 15, 1999 with respect to the real estate stated in paragraph 1 of the attached list.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. B, on March 15, 1999, entered into a contract with the Defendant to establish a mortgage (hereinafter “mortgage”) with the maximum debt amount of KRW 50 million with respect to the real estate stated in paragraph (1) of the attached list owned by the Defendant and its owner, and on the same day, completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case to the Defendant.

B. On March 24, 199, B entered into a contract on additional collateral security (hereinafter “the instant additional collateral security”) with the Defendant to add the real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the attached list No. 2 to the instant collateral security contract as the secured real estate. On March 26, 1999, B completed the registration of the establishment of the instant additional collateral security to the Defendant.

C. The payment order against B was finalized on February 21, 2006, stating that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff 102,822,748 won and 93,832,084 won with 15% interest per annum from January 18, 2006 to the date of full payment.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The relevant legal principles stipulate only the maximum amount of the debt to be secured, and as a security right established for the purpose of securing a certain limit in a settlement term for the future a large number of unspecified claims arising from a continuous transaction, which is a mortgage which is established by reserving the determination of the debt in the future, the act of creating the right to collateral must be separate from the act of establishing the right to collateral, and the burden of proof as to whether there was a legal act establishing the right to collateral at the time of establishment of the right to collateral has been asserted

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da72070 Decided December 24, 2009). B.

As to the instant case, such case shall be viewed.

The Plaintiff’s right to collateral security and objection thereto.