1. The Defendants received on January 15, 2004 from the Plaintiff each land indicated in the separate sheet of land.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 14, 2004, the Plaintiff entered into a contract to establish a mortgage between the amount of claim 33.6 million won and the due date: July 14, 2004; 25% per annum; and 25% per annum; and the debtor: the debtor: the debtor (hereinafter “the mortgage of this case”); and the Jeju District Court completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage as to each land listed in the annexed land list (hereinafter “each land of this case”).

B. On May 2009, the Defendants died in the deceased’s middle of May 2, 2009, and succeeded to the deceased’s re-identification.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-3-1 and 3-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants who inherited the deceased’s obligation are obliged to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the instant mortgage on July 15, 2014, when ten years have elapsed since the period of reimbursement for the secured obligation of the instant mortgage expired due to the expiration of the extinctive prescription on July 15, 2014.

I would like to say.

B. The Defendants’ defense and judgment 1) asserted that the statute of limitations interruption by the network H was suspended and the statute of limitations had not been expired until now, as the Plaintiff’s husband’s husband’s husband borrowed the secured debt of this case from the network G on or around January 2004, and the Plaintiff’s agent, such as borrowing the secured debt of this case from the network G, urged the net G to perform several times of performance, and the network H promised to repay the debt to Defendant F on or around May 18, 2009, and on May 201, the Defendants asserted that the secured debt of this case was not expired.

B. In view of the overall purport of the arguments in the statements Nos. 2-1, 2, 3, and 3-1 and 2 of the evidence Nos. 2-1, 3-2 as to whether the deceased H is the Plaintiff’s agent, ① the network G loaned KRW 30 million to the network H on April 10, 1996, and then, between the Plaintiff and the same day, the amount of each of the instant lands is KRW 33.6 million as to each of the instant lands between the Plaintiff and the obligor: a mortgage agreement concluded between the Plaintiff and the same month.