1. Of judgment of the first instance, the part requesting the cancellation of registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage shall be revoked, and the revoked part shall be applicable thereto;

1. The reasoning of the judgment by the court concerning this part of the underlying facts is the same as that by the second to fifth five pages of the judgment of the court of the first instance, except for the second to fifth page of the judgment as follows. Thus, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Attachment] The 2nd 3rd 2nd 2nd e.g., the 3rd e., the 3rd e.g., the 3rd e., the 4th e.g., the e.

2. Judgment on the claim for cancellation of the instant right to collateral security

A. 1) The Plaintiff and the Deceased requested L to cancel the existing collateral in order to secure the ability to obtain additional loans from K Bank. In doing so, the Plaintiff and the Deceased promised to set up the collateral (i.e., the maximum debt amount of KRW 117 million (i., the maximum debt amount of KRW 39 million) without delay after requesting L to cancel the existing collateral in order to secure the ability to secure the ability to obtain additional loans from K Bank. The Plaintiff and the Deceased were to cancel the L collateral and obtain a loan of KRW 300 million from K Bank, and the Deceased was to set up the instant collateral on the ground that the promise was made by the Plaintiff and the Deceased did not exist for the purpose of evading L’s obligations. Accordingly, the instant collateral agreement is null and void as a false conspiracy, and the registration of the establishment of the instant collateral should be cancelled as the ground for invalidation.2) Although the Plaintiff was in the status of the surety with respect to the Defendant’s loan obligations, there was no conflict between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the Plaintiff’s share in the land of this case 1 and 2.

On September 25, 2015, the Deceased actually accepted the instant loan obligation, and separately repaid the loan obligation of KRW 100,000 to M (N) on behalf of the Plaintiff.

The right to collateral security of this case is a claim for reimbursement against the Plaintiff on the ground of the assumption of the obligation and subrogation of the deceased, pursuant to the above share transfer agreement.