1. The defendant shall accept B, on June 27, 1992, the Busan District Court's Dong Branch with respect to the area of 516§³ prior to Busan District Court C, Busan District Court.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a creditor who was rendered a favorable judgment on June 27, 2005 in the Busan District Court Decision 2004Kadan6780 against B, etc. in the claim for reimbursement amount.

B. On June 27, 1992, B completed the registration of creation of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “registration of creation of the right to collateral security”) of the maximum debt amount of KRW 40,000,000 with respect to the size of 516 square meters prior to Busan-gun, Busan-gun, Busan-gun, and is currently insolvent.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. In light of the fact that the registration of creation of the right to collateral security in this case was completed on June 27, 1992 and there was no enforcement act, such as the application for voluntary auction, etc., the Plaintiff filed a claim for cancellation of the registration of creation of the right to collateral security in subrogation of the Defendant on the ground that the secured obligation was already repaid, or the statute of limitations has expired after the lapse of ten years from the due date.

B. The defendant, around March 1992, lent KRW 40,000 to pro-friendly B, and it was established as a security the right to collateral of this case, and Eul continued to approve the above loan obligations.

3. Determination

A. We examine the following: (a) A mortgage created by setting only the maximum amount of the debt to be secured and reserving the determination of the debt in the future (Article 357(1) of the Civil Act); and (b) a security right established to secure a certain limit in a settlement term for the future several unspecified claims arising from a continuous business relationship; (c) a legal act establishing a secured claim of the right to collateral should be separate from the act of establishing the right to collateral; and (d) the burden of proving whether there was a legal act establishing the secured claim of the right to collateral at the time of the establishment of the right to collateral exists

Supreme Court Decision 2009Da72070 Decided December 24, 2009 and Supreme Court Decision 2010Da107408 Decided April 28, 201.