The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 19, 2016, the Plaintiff decided to purchase KRW 150 of the shares in Gwangju City E in which C is the representative director at KRW 87 million and paid KRW 47 million among them to C.

B. On May 3, 2016, the Plaintiff offered real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as security and received a loan, and paid KRW 40 million in excess of the transaction balance. On May 3, 2016, the Plaintiff drafted a letter of consent to provide security in the name of the Plaintiff and a letter of delegation for notarial acts.

C. Meanwhile, with respect to the instant real estate, the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage”) was completed on May 4, 2016, based on the maximum debt amount of KRW 60 million, C, the debtor, the mortgagee, the Defendant of the right to collateral security, and the contract establishing a contract dated May 3, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that C provided the instant real estate as security to the financial institution and delegated only the authority to borrow money with the Plaintiff as the debtor. C borrowed money to the Defendant, who is a bond business operator, without the Plaintiff’s permission, and C completed the registration of creation of a mortgage over the instant real estate as the debtor and the Defendant as the mortgagee.

Therefore, the mortgage contract between C and the Defendant regarding the establishment of the instant right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) is null and void as an act of unauthorized representation. Therefore, the registration of establishment of the instant right to collateral security should be cancelled as an invalidation registration.

3. Determination

A. Where the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage on a real estate has been completed, the registration is presumed to have been lawful and to have publicly announced the state of true right. Therefore, the other party who asserts that the registration was unlawful is responsible to prove the opposing fact that the presumption is reversed.

Supreme Court Decision 201.4.4.