1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant 50,000,000 won 50,000 won / [the insurance coverage period] of the Plaintiff’s guaranteed insurance, and Defendant 21, which was based on the franchise agreement from February 28, 2012 to February 27, 2017, the Defendant (the previous mutual company, Bobi, Inc., Ltd.) entered into a franchise agreement with A around February 2012 (hereinafter “instant franchise agreement”).

(2) On February 29, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a franchise insurance contract with A, and issued a franchise business guarantee insurance policy to the Defendant as follows.

B. On October 2, 2013, C providing additional security to franchise business operators A concluded a mortgage contract with the Defendant and the Defendant, the maximum debt amount, KRW 50,000,000, and a debtor as to the said F land (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

On October 4, 2013, the defendant completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter referred to as the "mortgage of this case") regarding the above real estate.

C. (1) The Defendant terminated the franchise agreement with A on January 14, 2014. (2) On March 18, 2014, the Defendant claimed KRW 50 million as damages upon the termination of the franchise agreement to the Plaintiff.

On April 22, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million to the Defendant under the said guarantee insurance contract.

3) On March 20, 2014, the Defendant agreed on KRW 75,847,885 that A shall pay the final settlement amount to the Defendant upon the termination of the said franchise agreement with A. The Defendant was paid the remainder after subtracting the insurance money paid by the Plaintiff from KRW 50,000,000,000, out of the final settlement amount paid by the water guarantor C on May 28, 2014. (4) On June 20, 2014, the Defendant cancelled the registration of the creation of a neighboring mortgage on the instant real property.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-4, 8, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the argument is as follows: (a) the Defendant’s cancellation of the instant right to collateral security is as follows.