1. The defendant received on August 9, 2006 from the Incheon District Court Branch of the Incheon District Court with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list from the plaintiff.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the plaintiff started a transaction with the defendant around 2006, and entered into a contract with the defendant on July 31, 2006 to set the right to collateral security for the right to purchase goods, which caused 100 million won of the maximum debt amount, and accordingly, caused the defendant to establish the right to collateral security on August 9, 2006. The plaintiff entered into a final transaction with the defendant on November 17, 2010, and paid KRW 17,821,782 to the defendant on March 3, 201, thereby restricting the completion of the obligation arising from the transaction of goods.

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the secured obligation established due to the continuous termination of transactional relationship on November 17, 2010 has expired on March 3, 201, and therefore, the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage.

2. The defendant's assertion argues that the plaintiff's claim should be dismissed since the defendant ordered the plaintiff to cancel the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage.

On the other hand, there is no evidence to support the plaintiff that the defendant had ordered all the documents necessary for the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage, and even if the defendant's assertion was true, unless the registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage has been cancelled yet, the defendant still bears the duty of cancellation, so the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and acceptable.