1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Plaintiff borrowed a total of KRW 30 million between the Defendant and the Defendant through the Defendant, and then again agreed to receive KRW 30 million from the following day on July 30, 2013, when the Plaintiff received KRW 20 million from C as a broker by the Defendant, and KRW 30 million from D, the Plaintiff paid KRW 30 million to the Defendant’s agent in cash, but only received KRW 30 million, not KRW 60 million from the Defendant, and thus, the registration of the establishment of a mortgage of this case, which was created to secure the Defendant’s loan, should be cancelled on the ground of repayment.

2. According to the purport of the evidence No. 1 and the whole pleadings as to the real estate of this case, the registration of creation of a mortgage of this case was completed on August 1, 2013 with respect to the real estate of this case, the maximum debt amount of KRW 45 million, the plaintiff and the F, and the mortgagee of the right to collateral security, and the plaintiff can only be recognized as having withdrawn at a face value of KRW 30 million from a check with face value of KRW 1 million, and the testimony of Gap evidence No. 1 through 3 and witness G alone are insufficient to recognize the fact that the plaintiff would pay KRW 30 million to E, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Thus, the above argument of the plaintiff is without merit.

(Ga) In conclusion, even if the Plaintiff paid KRW 30 million to E, there is no evidence to acknowledge that E has the right to receive as the Defendant’s representative). 3. If so, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.