1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning for the court's reasoning of this judgment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where "the judgment on the defendant's argument" was adopted as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. 【Judgment on the Defendant’s argument】

A. Since the Defendant’s assertion C and the Plaintiff approved the obligation after the completion of the extinctive prescription on the secured claim of the instant mortgage, they renounced the extinctive prescription benefit.

B. 1) On December 24, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the instant mortgage (hereinafter “instant previous lawsuit”) in the Daegu District Court Branch of Port Branch of the Daegu District Court (No. 2013Da12523) (hereinafter “instant lawsuit”).

(2) On the other hand, on January 27, 2014, the Defendant filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate concerning each of the instant real estate with the Daegu District Court Branch Branch D (D) in order to execute the instant mortgage, and the said court rendered a ruling to commence the auction on January 27, 2014.

3) As above, while the previous lawsuit and the voluntary auction procedure of this case were in progress, C shall pay to the Defendant simultaneously with the payment of the compensation at the time of establishment of Nam-gu E at the port of port of port, and agreed not to raise any civil or criminal issue between the two parties, and agreed not to withdraw the current D auction case.” The agreement (Evidence 3 and Evidence 3; hereinafter referred to as the “instant agreement”) stating the purport that “The Plaintiff shall pay KRW 30 million to the Defendant at the time of establishment of Nam-gu E at the port of port of port of port.”

(4) After February 17, 2014, the Defendant voluntarily submitted a written withdrawal of the previous lawsuit around March 7, 2014 to the Defendant, on which two copies were written, and the name and seal of the Plaintiff were affixed to the instant agreement, and C signed thereon as the guarantor.

[Reasons for recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 3, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4 and the withdrawal of the lawsuit shall be made by the plaintiff.