1. On December 14, 2009, the Defendant registered the Seoul Eastern District Court with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 9, 2009, C (hereinafter “C”) asserted that the Plaintiff’s creditor is the Plaintiff’s obligee sent the Plaintiff a “pre-announcement of commencement of procedure”.

B. On December 14, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage on the attached list, owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in the future of the Defendant, on December 14, 2009, with regard to the establishment of a mortgage on the attached list, the contract to establish a mortgage and the maximum debt amount of which are KRW 300,000,000, based on the grounds for registration as of December 14, 2009 (hereinafter “the creation of a mortgage of this case”).

C. C obtained a provisional attachment decision on December 21, 2009 (Seoul Eastern District Court 2009Kadan14221) and seized the instant real estate on February 22, 2010, and the enforcement thereof was revoked.

Plaintiff

In order to evade the compulsory execution of C, the fact was investigated by the investigative agency on the ground of the fact that the Plaintiff was responsible for false debt by completing the registration of the establishment of the creation of the neighboring mortgage of this case, in the absence of a debt owed to the Defendant, and was determined to have been suspected.

(In Seoul East District Prosecutors' Office 2009, 7585. [Reasons for Recognition] / [In the absence of any dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, 3, and 4 (including the branch number in the case of provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply], the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The registration of creation of a mortgage on the instant real estate was anticipated by C to commence compulsory execution on the instant real estate, and is null and void as it was established without the secured debt from the beginning for the purpose of evading this. Even if the instant secured debt exists, the creditor of the instant secured debt is D, and the instant secured debt differs from the creditor of the secured debt, and is null and void against the subsidiary nature of the secured mortgage. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancelling the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the instant real estate to the Plaintiff.