1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff Co., Ltd. (Representative D; hereinafter “C”) on the land owned by B

(2) If the Plaintiff had no property to be offered as security any more to the Plaintiff, in collusion with G (194) in collusion with G (194) and with G (1) that provided a false collateral security on the land of Pyeongtaek-siF Forest and Forest land of 27047 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”), the Plaintiff forged B’s resident registration certificate using G’s resident registration certificate in collusion with G (1949 students).

3) G shows the forged B’s resident registration certificate to the employee of the community service center, and received B’s certificate of personal seal impression. 4) D, G, etc. visited the Defendant’s office as a certified judicial scrivener on October 5, 2012 to the Defendant and requested the Defendant to register the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on the instant land. At the time, G presented the forged B’s resident registration certificate and certificate of personal seal impression, and marked B’s name on the registration documents, such as the power of attorney.

Accordingly, the Defendant drafted a confirmation document confirming that G is B, and based on this, the registration of the establishment of a mortgage was completed on October 5, 2012, which became the debtor C, the maximum debt amount of 3 billion won, and the Plaintiff as the mortgagee of the right to collateral security.

B. The Plaintiff’s employees in charge of the Plaintiff’s oil supply company found the Plaintiff’s normal establishment of the right to collateral security, and additionally supplied the Plaintiff’s total market price of KRW 3,524,648,371 to October 5, 2012.

C. B, which became aware of the completion of the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage as to the invalidity of the cause as mentioned above, one of the following grounds after the oil was supplied, filed a lawsuit claiming the cancellation of registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage on November 2013.