1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff sought registration procedure for cancellation of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) to the Defendant, who is the mortgagee of the real estate indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant land”) by subrogationing the Plaintiff’s right to collateral security against B as the right to collateral security, due to the completion of the extinctive prescription of the secured claim, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”).

2. The obligee’s subrogation right refers to the obligee’s right to exercise by subrogation the obligor’s right to a third party, where it is necessary for the obligee to preserve his/her own claim against the obligor. Therefore, in order for the obligee to exercise this right in court, the obligee must prove the existence of the claim, the necessity of preservation, the arrival of time limit, etc., in order for the obligee to exercise it in court, and where it is not recognized, the obligee’s right to the obligor to be preserved by subrogation is inappropriate (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da39918, Aug. 30, 2012). In cases where the obligee’s right to the obligor to be preserved by subrogation is a monetary claim

(3) The plaintiff's subrogation claim is unlawful because it does not have any evidence that the plaintiff's subrogation claim is insolvent at the time of the closing of argument in this case, since the plaintiff's subrogation claim does not need to be preserved. The plaintiff's subrogation claim is unlawful because it does not have any need to be preserved. The plaintiff's subrogation claim is unlawful. The plaintiff's subrogation claim is not necessary.

4. If so, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.