1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasons for the entry of this case by the court of first instance concerning this case are as follows: (a) the plaintiff of the third 11th 1st son of the judgment of the court of first instance as "defendant"; and (b) the defendant's assertion in the trial is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments as to the matters alleged in the court of first instance, and therefore,

2. The defendant asserts that, on April 23, 1992, the plaintiff sold the real estate of this case to E to substitute the repayment of the above loan obligation between the defendant's husband E, a representative of the defendant, and the loan obligation of this case became extinct by payment in substitutes, so the plaintiff's claim of this case on the premise that the above loan obligation became extinct by prescription is groundless.

However, the payment in substitutes is a physical contract which is established when another performance is actually performed in lieu of the original obligation, and if the other performance is the ownership transfer of the real estate, the existing obligation is extinguished because the registration of ownership transfer is completed only if the other performance is the ownership transfer of the real estate. Thus, the defendant or E did not have the ownership transfer registration for each of the real estate of this case, and the registration of the establishment of a mortgage over the maximum debt amount of KRW 75 million has been completed according to

3. If so, the decision of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.