The defendant received on October 2, 2003 from the Changwon District Court for each real estate listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

(a) The following facts of recognition do not conflict between the Parties, or are recognized by each description of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply):

(1) The Plaintiff is a provisional attachment that completed the registration of provisional attachment on August 31, 2005 by the Changwon District Court Decision 2005Ka 3799 (the claimed amount KRW 25,000,000) with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by Nonparty C (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”).

(2) On October 2, 2003, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “registration of the instant right to collateral security”) with respect to each of the above real estate by the Changwon District Court, the Changwon District Court, No. 14403, Oct. 2, 2003, the maximum amount of KRW 150,000,000, and the debtor C and the mortgagee as the defendant.

(3) C died on December 5, 2006

B. The Plaintiff asserted that the registration of the establishment of the above right to collateral security should be cancelled because there is no claim against the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security or even if there is a family's existence, the ten-year prescription has expired, and thus, the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security should be cancelled. Thus, according to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 3, it is acknowledged that the Defendant's claim against the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security security security of this case against the Defendant C was signed and sealed by Nonparty D on Oct. 7, 2005 on the confirmation document that Nonparty D acknowledged the Plaintiff's claim against the remaining purchase and sale of the right to collateral security of this case on Oct. 7, 2005, which was established before Oct. 7, 2005 with a confirmation document confirming the existence of the right to collateral security payment of this case, barring any special circumstance.

Since it is reasonable to see that the statute of limitations has expired at the latest pursuant to Article 162 (1) of the Civil Act on the date when ten years elapsed from October 7, 2005, the written confirmation of the above fact was prepared.

On the other hand, the defendant, after the closure of the pleadings of this case, around August 2010, through the documents prepared on December 24, 2020.