1. Of the instant lawsuits, the part demanding the confirmation of existence of a debt and the registration office of the Daegu District Court on March 21, 2017 were received as the receipt of No. 40665.

1. Indication of request (Article 208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act);

A. On November 30, 2011, the Plaintiff created a right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) with a maximum debt amount of KRW 300 million on the creditor, Han Bank, Inc., for the debtor C with respect to real estate indicated in the attached list, one’s own ownership.

B. On the same day, the Plaintiff completed the registration of establishment of the neighboring real estate (hereinafter “registration of establishment of the neighboring real estate of this case”) by the Daegu District Court No. 58912.

C. Since then, the Defendant subrogated to the obligation of the foregoing right to collateral security and completed the supplementary registration of the transfer of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant supplementary registration”) with No. 36437, Mar. 13, 2017.

On August 10, 2017, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 3,041,600 for the secured debt and enforcement cost of the said mortgage.

E. Therefore, the Plaintiff, against the Defendant, sought the confirmation of the establishment of the instant mortgage and the additional registration as the secured debt does not exist, and sought the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the said neighboring mortgage and the additional registration.

2. On the ground that the plaintiff's additional registration with the acquisition of the right to collateral security in this case against the defendant who has completed the additional registration with the acquisition of the right to collateral security in this case, the defendant shall be deemed to have led to a confession under Article 257 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage of this case.

3. Regarding the part of the lawsuit of this case concerning the claim for the confirmation of the existence of a debt among the lawsuits of this case, the plaintiff sought cancellation of each of the above registrations on the ground that the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case and the additional registration became extinct due to repayment of the secured debt of this case, and sought confirmation of the non-existence of the secured debt. In such a case, the direct means of resolving the dispute with the validity and in