The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are the judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part, including the Defendant’s real estate security loan and the progress of real estate auction procedures, is as follows: (a) the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in order to secure “to secure” No. 1 of the part indicated in paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the debtor C and the mortgagee as the defendant, as the real estate owner listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is the same as the judgment of the first instance; and (b) therefore, (c) this part is cited pursuant to the main sentence of

2. Determination

A. According to the Plaintiff’s assertion on the scope of secured obligation under the instant collective security agreement, it shall be deemed as merely an example of general transaction terms and conditions, and its binding force shall be excluded. There was no separate written confirmation of the scope of secured obligation for the instant loans, and since the Defendant did not obtain an extension consent from the Plaintiff, the instant loans are not included in the secured obligation for the instant collective security.

Therefore, in the auction procedure of the real estate of this case, 16,239,936 won, which the defendant received as dividends, has been acquired without legal grounds, and the defendant shall return it to the plaintiff with unfair profits.

B. In order to interpret that the pertinent right to collateral security (right to collateral security) only guarantees a specific obligation despite the statement in the agreement on the establishment of the right to collateral security (right to collateral security), the person who asserts such special circumstance should prove the existence thereof. It is insufficient to recognize that the instant loan is not included in the secured obligation of the instant right to collateral security solely on the ground that the Plaintiff

Rather, the following facts or circumstances revealed in full view of the purport of the entire evidence argument, i.e., the instant agreement on the establishment of the right to collateral security, which is ① the establishment of the right to collateral security, is subject to the establishment of the right to collateral security.