1. Defendant B’s KRW 100,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from June 4, 2013 to August 11, 2015, and August 2015.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 3, 2013, the Plaintiff leased KRW 100,000,00 to Defendant B on condition that each of the instant real estates listed in the separate sheet owned by E (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”) is offered as security, setting the due date for reimbursement on October 2, 2013, and completed the joint establishment registration of collateral security of KRW 150,000,000 for each of the instant real estates on the same day.

(hereinafter referred to as “the establishment registration of each of the preceding units of this case”). E is referred to Defendant B, and Defendant D is a certified judicial scrivener in charge of applying for the establishment registration of each of the preceding units of this case, and Defendant C is an employee of Defendant D A certified judicial scrivener office.

B. The Plaintiff filed an application for an auction to exercise a security right to each of the instant real estate, and received a decision to commence auction on October 15, 2013, while Defendant B did not repay the debt with the loan even after the due date.

C. On November 14, 2013, E asserted that Defendant B forged a seal imprint certificate, mortgage contract, and power of attorney, etc., and filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff at the Jung-gu District Court Goyang branch seeking the cancellation of the registration of creation of each of the instant mortgages.

위 법원은 2015. 2. 12. 피고 B이 E의 인감도장과 근저당권설정등기 위임장을 위조하고 등기의무자 본인 확인용 확인서면에도 E이 아닌 성명불상자의 우무인(右拇印)을 한 사실 등을 인정한 다음, 이 사건 각 근저당권설정등기가 위조된 서류에 의하여 마친 원인무효의 등기라고 판단하고 말소등기절차의 이행을 명하는 판결을 선고하였다

(Mayang Branch of the District Court 2013da41472). The above judgment became final and conclusive as it became final and conclusive by the expiration of the appeal period.

E. Meanwhile, Defendant B, C, etc. filed a complaint with the forgery of a private document, etc., and Defendant B, in the course of the investigation, ordered that the person liable for registration was the person liable for registration himself/herself in the confirmation document.

[Based on recognition] There is no dispute, and there are evidence Nos. 1 to 4.