1. The main claim part of the lawsuit in this case is dismissed.

2. The part of the conjunctive claim in the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

1. Basic facts

A. As indicated in the separate guarantee and the table of subrogation, the Plaintiff provided credit guarantee to E (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) for receiving money from a bank, and C guaranteed the corporate credit guarantee obligations of the sub-committee. On January 2013, Nonparty Company (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) paid the principal and interest of the sub-committee by subrogation.

B. Meanwhile, the registration of the provisional claim for transfer (hereinafter “instant provisional registration”) was completed on April 22, 201 by the Daegu District Court No. 22695 on May 4, 2001, on the ground that the registration of the provisional claim for transfer was completed on April 22, 201, under the Daegu District Court No. 22695 (hereinafter “instant provisional registration”). On April 22, 201, the Defendant completed the registration of the transfer (hereinafter “instant provisional registration”). The registration of the transfer was received on April 29, 2013 by the Daegu District Court No. 2072, the receipt of April 29, 2013 on April 29, 2013.

C. According to the copy of the register on the real estate of this case, the provisional registration of this case and the registration of this case are recorded in the column of "order number" like "A (the matters concerning ownership)" and the phrase "cancellation of provisional seizure registration, etc. due to the principal registration based on the provisional registration of this case" is stated.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, each entry in Gap 1 through 6 (including the paper number), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. In the case of the claim for cancellation of provisional registration against the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Daegu District Court 2014Kadan7756, which was filed by F against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “ separate case”), the Defendant recognized that the provisional registration of this case was null and void due to the lapse of the exclusion period of 10 years, the right to complete the purchase and sale was extinguished, and that the registration of this case is null and void. As such, the Defendant ought to implement the provisional registration of this case and the procedure for registration cancellation of this case.