1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B shall assist Suwon District Court with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 9, 197, the Plaintiff entered into a mortgage agreement with Defendant B on the grounds of the debtor, mortgagee B, and the maximum debt amount of 30 million won with respect to the real estate indicated in the separate sheet, which is owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant real estate”), and completed the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage with Defendant B as of No. 23281, Jul. 10, 1997, which was received on July 10, 1997 by Suwon District Court.

B. On June 19, 199 with the deceased E (hereinafter “the deceased”), the Plaintiff entered into a mortgage agreement between the Plaintiff, the deceased, and the maximum debt amount of 30 million won with respect to the instant real estate. The Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage with the deceased as the Gyeyang Branch of the Suwon District Court No. 24529, Jul. 3, 1999.

C. On August 24, 2016, Defendant Republic of Korea seized Defendant B’s above-mortgage claims, and completed the registration of seizure of the instant real estate on August 31, 2016.

The Deceased died on November 29, 2013, and the Defendant C and D inherited one-half shares of the deceased’s property.

E. On September 7, 2017, Defendant National Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Bank”) seized the Deceased’s above-mortgaged claim, and completed the registration of seizure of the instant real estate on September 25, 201.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. In a case where a party who receives benefit from the due date of payment of the judgment claim against Defendant B, C, and D fails to assert and prove the due date of payment, it is reasonable to view that the claim is a claim without setting the due date and the extinctive prescription is in progress from the time of its establishment.

In this case, there is no assertion by the defendants that the period of repayment has been set with respect to each of the above secured claims, and thus the secured claims of each of the above secured claims are established as a claim without setting the period.