1. According to the real estate security trust agreement dated August 17, 2012 concerning real estate listed in the attached list No. 1 list, the defendant's second order is applied.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a)The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in each entry in Gap evidence of 1 to 11 (including each number), by integrating the purpose of the entire pleadings:

(1) On August 17, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a real estate security trust agreement (hereinafter “instant trust agreement”) with Korea Trust Co., Ltd. with respect to the instant land on August 17, 2012, as the owner of the new interest rate of No. 115 and No. 13 (hereinafter “instant land”) and the implementer of the new construction project for the apartment of No. 497 units on the instant land, and completed the registration of ownership transfer to Korea Trust Co., Ltd.

Under the above trust agreement, the first beneficiary is the mining credit union, the second beneficiary is the defendant who is the construction corporation of the above apartment.

(2) Around August 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a business agreement and construction contract (hereinafter “instant business agreement and construction contract”) with the Defendant with the content that the Plaintiff carries out the business, such as securing ownership of the instant land and obtaining overall approval and permission, and the Defendant entered into a business agreement and a construction contract with the content that three multi-family housing units with 24.3 billion won above the ground.

(3) After that, the Plaintiff and the Defendant terminated the instant business agreement and construction contract on January 9, 2015, and paid the Defendant totaling KRW 1,093,933,357 of the loans and interest incurred by the Defendant in connection with the instant business, and at the same time, entered into an agreement with the Defendant to waive all rights under the instant business agreement and construction contract (hereinafter “instant agreement”), and accordingly, the Plaintiff paid the full amount of the said agreement to the Defendant.

(4) Thereafter, the Plaintiff and Korea Trust Co., Ltd. requested the Defendant to return the certificate of preferential right and submit a written consent to the termination of preferential right to benefit in order to change the entries in the collateral trust ledger, but the Defendant did not comply with such request.

(b).