1. The contract to establish a right to collateral security concluded on September 3, 2012 between the Defendant and B regarding the real estate stated in the attached list was 15.

1. Case summary

A. B, on November 30, 201, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s loans KRW 29,900,000, interest rate of KRW 25.9%, interest rate of KRW 29%, and interest rate for delay, and KRW 29%. However, the 36-month period entered into a contract with the Bank of Security (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) and received KRW 29,900,000,00.

B. B, from August 2, 2012, the repayment of the principal and interest, lost the benefit of time due to delay, and was unable to pay the remaining principal and interest of the loan amounting to KRW 18,091,813, and delay damages.

C. On September 3, 2012, the Defendant, who was omitted, concluded a mortgage agreement with the maximum debt amount of KRW 20,000 on the real estate indicated in the separate sheet owned by B (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and completed the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage based on the said agreement.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 4, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Assertion and determination

A. According to the facts of the recognition of the preserved claim, the Plaintiff’s preserved claim is recognized, since the claim against B was already established at the time of the contract to establish the right to collateral of this case.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserts that, as the Defendant’s cancellation of the instant loan contract on the ground that “B is suspected to have a close relationship with the Defendant’s employee and the employees of the Defendant who had visited the Defendant’s branch and entered into the instant loan contract with the Defendant by deceiving Party C,” the Defendant did not have any secured claim.

Even according to the defendant's assertion, it is evident that C does not conclude the instant loan contract on behalf of the defendant or as the defendant's employee.

Therefore, unless there is any assertion or proof as to the deception of B in collusion between C and the defendant, the relationship between C and the defendant is closely related.

The right to revoke to B on the ground of C’s deception.