1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be found in full view of Gap evidence 1, evidence 4, evidence 6, evidence 14, evidence 15, evidence 17, evidence 17 through 19, Eul evidence 2-4 through 7, 3, evidence 4-2, 8, 9, evidence 10-1, evidence 4-2, 8, 9, evidence 10-1, witness D, and evidence C's testimony.

On January 1, 2007, the Defendant loaned KRW 67,000,000 per month for interest to C, KRW 700,000 per month for payment period, KRW 300,00 for the loan bond (hereinafter referred to as “the loan bond bond of this case”) on December 31, 207, and KRW D jointly and severally guaranteed the above obligation against C.

B. On October 22, 2008, C entered into a sales contract with the Defendant for each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the purchase price of KRW 750,000,000, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 23, 2008.

C. Around that time, C transferred the claim amounting to KRW 88,500,000 according to the above sales contract with the Plaintiff as a consolation money due to a divorce, and the Defendant, on October 23, 2008, made a registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “mortgage”) with respect to the instant real estate in which the maximum debt amount is KRW 88,50,000,000, to secure this.

On October 28, 2008, the Plaintiff subrogated for C’s debt of KRW 11,200,000 to the Clean Agricultural Cooperative, and on October 29, 2008, subrogated for C’s debt of KRW 50,000,000 to Busan-dong Agricultural Cooperative.

E. On March 19, 2009, the Defendant, based on the instant loan claim, was rendered a ruling of provisional seizure against D’s secured debt of the instant right to collateral security against the Plaintiff by Ulsan District Court 2009Kadan1621, which was 67,000,000 won.

F. D immediately after the Plaintiff paid KRW 35,00,000 to the above wage creditors on June 12, 2009, in a lawsuit seeking revocation of fraudulent act by this court 2008Gadan4777, which was brought against the Plaintiff by the wage creditors against the Plaintiff by the wage creditors against the Plaintiff.