The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 18, 2008, the Defendant registered the establishment of the mortgage of KRW 50,000,000 on the basis of the maximum debt amount on February 15, 2008, as to each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet owned by Jung-gu District Court, Dong-cheon Registry, 2519D (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”), received on February 18, 2008, as to each of the instant real estates listed in the separate sheet owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “the creation of the mortgage of this case”).

(2) A. D. A. A. B. A. A. A. A. B. (a) concluded a credit card membership agreement with the Plaintiff and used the credit card issued by the Plaintiff, and failed to pay the Plaintiff the credit card user fee. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D on November 10, 2010 against the Seoul Northern District Court 2010 Ghana 117017, and rendered a judgment that “D shall pay to the Plaintiff interest rate of 29.9% per annum from May 21, 2020 to the date of full payment,” and that “D shall pay to the Plaintiff interest rate of 5,052,704 won and 4,238,35 won from the said court.” The said judgment became final and conclusive around that time. The said judgment is based on the grounds for recognition, the Plaintiff’s debt against D’s Plaintiff is KRW 21,648,019 as of June 14, 2019.

2. Judgment on the party's assertion and the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the title truster who entrusted the name of the real estate of this case to D, and is in the position of the mortgagee who takes the claim for return of unjust enrichment against D as the secured claim.

The Defendant did not exercise the secured debt of the right to collateral security until 10 years have passed since the completion of the registration of establishment of the right to collateral security of the instant case. If the secured debt of the right to collateral security was not exercised for 10 years, the extinctive prescription expired after the completion of the ten-year period.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, a creditor of D, seeks cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the instant neighboring mortgage by subrogation of D.

It is true that the defendant waives the prescription interest of D.