1. The part of the main claim among the counterclaim of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is the Plaintiff-Counterclaim Defendant on 390.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 8, 2005, C decided to lend 400 million won to the Defendant at an interest rate of 2% per month, and on June 28, 2006 due date for payment, and paid 360 million won calculated by deducting 24 million won (three-month interest) and 10 million won for good offices.

B. On November 9, 2005, the Defendant completed the registration of creation of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) on November 8, 2005 with regard to the real estate listed in the [Attachment List (hereinafter “instant land”) as collateral for the above loan debt, as to the establishment of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) stated in the purport of claim C as the mortgagee of the right to collateral security, on November 8, 2005.

C. On October 6, 2010, C transferred claims, such as the above loan, to the Plaintiff. At that time, C notified the Defendant of the purport of the assignment of claims, and the above notification reached the Defendant around that time.

On October 6, 2010, on July 8, 2015, the transfer registration of the right to collateral security stated in the purport of the claim was made under the name of the plaintiff for the reason of the transfer of the confirmed claim.

[Basis] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (the document establishing a mortgage: The authenticity of the whole document is presumed to be established because there is no dispute over each defendant's stamp image part. The defendant defense that this document was forged by D, E, F, etc., but there is no evidence to acknowledge it), Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 13, 15, and 16, and the purport of the whole argument.

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the part of the main claim among the counterclaims is primarily sought against the plaintiff for the cancellation of the registration of creation of a collateral on July 8, 2015, which was completed on the land of this case on the ground of the absence of the relevant secured obligation. The additional registration of the transfer of a collateral security is to specify the succession to the right by means of the existing establishment of a collateral security on the register, and is in the form of a principal registration, which is subordinate to the existing establishment of a collateral security, and thus constitutes a whole principal registration when the secured obligation is extinguished.