1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On November 2006, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 40 million from Defendant B as collateral and completed the registration of creation of a mortgage over the maximum debt amount of KRW 50 million with respect to the amount of KRW 1,135 square meters prior to C at the time of leisure water owned by the Plaintiff as the Incheon District Court Branch of Gwangju District Court No. 22597, Nov. 23, 2006, No. 22597, Nov. 23, 2006.

(hereinafter “instant collateral security registration”). B.

On April 4, 2008, Defendant B, a creditor against Defendant B, seized the instant right to collateral security of this case, and completed the supplementary registration on April 7, 2008.

C. On July 29, 2015, the Defendant Republic of Korea, a creditor against Defendant B, seized the instant right to collateral security (mortgage) and completed the supplementary registration on July 30, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of the whole pleadings (for defendant B, service by public notice)

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, on March 20, 2007, Defendant B paid KRW 30 million to Defendant B, and paid KRW 10 million in 10,000 per month from March 28, 2007 to March 28, 2008 by dividing the total amount of KRW 10,000,000 per month and repaid all of the secured obligations under the instant mortgage contract, the establishment registration of the instant collateral must be cancelled due to the extinction of the secured obligation. The Plaintiff asserts that Defendant Inn-si, the execution creditor of the instant collateral claim, and Korea, a third party with interest, have the substantive legal obligation to consent to the cancellation registration of the instant collateral registration.

According to Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, it is recognized that the plaintiff borrowed KRW 30 million from D on March 20, 2007, and that the plaintiff has transferred to defendant B five times each month from March 28, 2008 to August 28, 2007. However, it is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff paid to defendant B the full amount of KRW 40 million, which is the secured obligation of the contract to establish the right to collateral security, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3...