1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to the real estate stated in the attached list, Defendant C shall have jurisdiction over the registration office of the Kug Government District Court.

1. Determination

A. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet, the ownership transfer registration was completed under the name of the plaintiff on November 24, 1995, and on October 13, 2001, the ownership transfer registration was completed under the name of the plaintiff Dong Dong Dong-dong on October 13, 201. On April 23, 1996, the establishment registration was completed on April 24, 1996 on the ground that the mortgage contract was concluded on April 24, 1996 (No. 4848) with a maximum amount of 6 million won for the creditor C, the debtor, the plaintiff, and the maximum amount of debt (No. 4848). The defendant Republic of Korea seized the above collateral security claim on August 25, 2016 and completed the supplementary registration on August 30, 2016.

B. On the other hand, in this case, where the Plaintiff asserted that the secured debt above was repaid or extinguished by prescription, Defendant C had to first prove the establishment and scope of the secured debt, and it cannot be deemed that the secured debt is presumed due to the existence of the secured debt.

In addition, it is reasonable to view that, in the event that the party who takes advantage of the existence of the period of reimbursement fails to assert the period of payment, the claim shall be deemed a claim without setting the period of payment and the extinctive prescription shall proceed from the time of its establishment.

Therefore, the statute of limitations expired on April 23, 1996 as of April 23, 1996, which was the date of establishing the right to collateral security, presumed to be the date of establishment of the right to collateral security with no time limit fixed.

I would like to say.

C. Therefore, the Plaintiff as a party to the above mortgage contract, and the Defendant C is obligated to cancel the above mortgage, and the Defendant Republic of Korea is a third party with a interest in the registration, and is obligated to express his/her consent to the above cancellation registration.

2. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is justified.

However, in light of the circumstances of the instant case, the litigation cost incurred between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.