1. The defendant on May 2008, as to each real estate stated in the attached Form to the plaintiff, the Gwangju District Court's net support registry office of the Gwangju District Court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant, on January 11, 2008, lent KRW 100 million to C at the interest rate of 30% per annum.

B. On May 16, 2008, the Plaintiff completed on May 16, 2008 the registration of the establishment of a mortgage (hereinafter “registration of the establishment of a mortgage of the instant case”) around the Defendant, under Article 6368 received on May 16, 2008, from the 2008 registry office of the Gwangju District Court Netcheon-gu Branch of the Gwangju District Court as a joint security.

C. On June 14, 2016, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 100 million with the Mine District Court No. 3572, No. 2016, on the ground of the Defendant’s refusal to receive the collateral in order to repay the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security as a surety on each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 100 million with the maximum debt amount of the instant right to collateral security on June 14, 2016, and thus, the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security was extinguished. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the instant right to collateral

In this regard, the defendant argued that the right to collateral security of this case cannot be said because he did not receive all the principal and interest of the loan claim against C. However, the plaintiff is merely responsible within the scope of the maximum debt amount as a surety to secure another's property, so the above

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.