The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 4, 2011, the Busan District Court Nam-dong Office of Registry of the Incheon District Court (No. 63515), and on April 30, 2013, the Busan Dental Credit Union (hereinafter “each of the instant mortgages”) completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “each of the instant mortgages”).

B. On October 29, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of each of the collateral security under the receipt of No. 102879 of the same date and No. 102877 of the same registry office on the same day.

C. As to the real estate stated in the attached list, the voluntary auction procedure is in progress at the Incheon District Court A and the same court B (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).

On April 29, 2015, the Defendant filed a civil petition with the Financial Supervisory Service (Dispute Mediation) against the Busan Dental Credit Union to the effect that each of the instant mortgages was illegally established.

In addition, on February 4, 2016, the Defendant did not consent to the establishment of each of the instant collective security rights at the instant auction procedure, and the Plaintiff’s transfer of finalized claims is against extinguished claims or against the purport that the transfer procedure is unlawful, and the procedure is in progress.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that each of the instant collective security rights in this case has been duly and effectively transferred. Thus, the plaintiff sought confirmation of the status of a person holding the collective security right in each of the instant collective security rights, the defendant files a civil petition regarding each of the instant collective security rights, files an objection against the decision to commence auction, and asserts that there is a benefit of confirmation as it is highly likely to interfere with the plaintiff's exercise of rights in the future.

3. The defendant's defense of this case is a defense that there is no interest in the confirmation of this case.