1. C:

A. As to the real estate stated in the attached list, Defendant A shall have jurisdiction over the registration office of the Daegu District Court on February 19, 1993.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 28, 2006, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the Seoul Central District Court 2006da479876 on the Plaintiff’s monetary claim against C and D seeking the payment of the acquisition amount. On April 5, 2007, the above court rendered a judgment that “C shall jointly and severally with D pay KRW 38,068,815 and any delay damages for KRW 21,986,312 among them,” and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. As to the real estate listed in the separate list owned by C (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on the part of the defendants’ establishment registration of each ownership in the name of the defendants as to the real estate owned by C, the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage on February 19, 193 was completed on February 18, 1993, the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage on February 19, 1993, and the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage on February 10, 1998, which was completed on February 11, 1998, by the Daegu District Court, the Daegu District Court (Seoul District Court) of the Daegu District Court on February 11, 1998, which was based on the establishment of a neighboring mortgage agreement.

(hereinafter) When the establishment registration of each of the above units in the name of the defendants is referred to collectively, each of the above units of mortgage of this case shall be referred to.

Insolvent and family relationship 1) C is in a state of exceeding obligations, other than the instant real estate as of the date of the closing of argument in this case. 2) and Defendant B are female students of Defendant C, and Defendant A is the husband of Defendant B.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 and 2, witness E's witness E's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Each of the instant mortgages in the name of the Defendants as to the cause of the claim was completed on February 18, 1993 and February 10, 1998, respectively, on the basis of each of the instant mortgages in the name of the Defendants, as seen in the underlying facts. On the other hand, it is apparent that ten years have passed since each of the instant mortgages in the name of the Defendants was extinguished by the statute of limitations. Thus, each of the instant mortgages in the name of the Defendants is deemed to have expired.

and each.