1. The defendant shall assist the plaintiff with a branch court of Incheon District Court with respect to three-fifths of the real estate stated in the attached list.

1. According to the evidence evidence No. 1, the defendant is recognized as having completed the registration of establishment of a collateral security (hereinafter "registration of collateral security in this case") under the status No. 9149, which was received on March 24, 1998, with respect to three-fifths of the plaintiff's title among the real estate listed in the attached list among the real estate in the attached list.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that, while borrowing money from C, the Plaintiff created a mortgage under the name of C, and thereafter, D transferred the mortgage from C along with the Defendant, received documents necessary for the registration from the Plaintiff, and subsequently additionally completed the registration of the instant mortgage under the pretext that D would find the Plaintiff and increase the maximum debt amount.

Then, the registration of the right to collateral security in this case, which has no relationship with the Plaintiff, remains without cancelling the registration of the right to collateral security in this case, even though the Plaintiff fully repaid the debt to D, and the registration of the right to collateral security in this case must be cancelled

B. The judgment of the court below is a mortgage established by setting only the maximum amount of the debt to be secured and reserving the determination of the debt in the future. Since it is a security established for securing a certain limit in a settlement term for the future a number of unspecified claims arising from a continuous transaction, there must be a legal act establishing a secured claim of the right to collateral separate from the act of establishing the right to collateral, and the burden of proving whether there was a legal act establishing a secured claim of the right to collateral at the time of establishing the right to collateral exists

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da72070 Decided December 24, 2009, etc.). Then, the Defendant bears the burden of proof as to whether there was a legal act, etc. to establish the secured debt of the instant mortgage registration. The Defendant bears the burden of proof.