1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The real estate stated in attached Table 1 (1) among the instant lawsuit.

1. This part of the judgment of this court is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, because it is identical to the statement “1. Presumed facts” in the reasoning of the judgment, which is cited by the main sentence of Article 420

2. We examine ex officio whether the claim for cancellation of registration of the establishment registration of the establishment of the establishment of each of the instant lawsuits of this case is legitimate or not, which was completed with respect to the real estate listed in [Attachment 1] paragraphs (1), (2), (8) through (10) of [Attachment 1].

Of the litigation process for seeking the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage, where the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage was cancelled due to auction, there is no legal interest in seeking the cancellation thereof. In full view of the respective entries and arguments in the evidence Nos. 37 and 41 as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet No. 1, the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage completed as No. 54849 on May 22, 2014, which was completed as of No. 54849 on May 22, 2015, the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage completed as of May 22, 2014 as of the real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the same list No. 54850 on May 30, 2014; the registration office may recognize the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage as the registration office’s receipt of each of the above list No. 2581,540 on May 14, 2014.

3. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) paid the Defendant a total of KRW 2,525,608,746 to the construction cost of the instant case. 2) The instant building requires KRW 599,663,983 for remuneration due to various defects in construction works.