With respect to real estate stated in the attached list to the plaintiff, the defendant shall register the vice-branch of the Daegu District Court and November 7, 1997.

1. Basic facts

A. With respect to the real estate in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff’s father C (hereinafter “the instant real estate”), the registration of the vice-branch branch of the Daegu District Court and the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “registration of the creation of the instant right to collateral security”) was completed on November 7, 1997, with the maximum amount of KRW 50 million, the debtor D, and the debtor as the Defendant of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “registration of the instant right to collateral security”).

B. C died on July 18, 2019, and the Plaintiff solely inherited the instant real estate after consultation with the inherited property division, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership on March 12, 2020.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s registration of the establishment of the instant right to collateral security should be cancelled inasmuch as there is no secured debt or the secured debt becomes extinct due to the completion of prescription.

B. According to the overall purport of the statements and changes in the evidence Nos. 2, 4-1, 6-1, 6-2, and 3 as to the non-existence of the secured debt, C borrowed approximately KRW 140 million in total from the Defendant until October 30, 1997, and it is recognized that the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security was completed with the debt as the secured debt, so this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is unacceptable.

(c)

A claim for the extinction of the statute of limitations as to the secured obligation has not been determined and the statute of limitations has run from the date of occurrence of the claim (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da74700, Dec. 13, 2012, etc.). At the time E borrowed approximately KRW 140,000,000 from the Defendant, the Defendant and E set the period for the repayment of the above loan obligation at the time when E borrowed approximately KRW 140,000 from the Defendant.

There is no evidence to prove that the statute of limitations expired from November 7, 1997, when the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security of this case was completed at the latest, and the statute of limitations expired on November 7, 2007 after the lapse of 10 years from that date.

The plaintiff is liable for the above borrowed money.