1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 1, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) prepared and delivered a limited joint and several guarantee certificate with the content of joint and several liability within KRW 150,000,000 for the Defendant’s debt owed by Nonparty D, the husband of the Plaintiff, to the Defendant; (b) on December 4, 2012, the Plaintiff created a collateral security of KRW 60,000,000 for the maximum debt amount under Article 2202 of the Busan E-T building No. 502, Busan, the 22, 200,000 owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real property”).

B. Upon the Defendant’s application for auction based on the above right to collateral security, an auction was conducted with respect to the instant real estate (Jansan District Court Branch C) and on October 28, 2014, the instant real estate was sold and on the date of distribution on December 23, 2014.

C. On the date of distribution of this case, the Defendant received 60,000,000 won as the third-class mortgagee, and the Plaintiff raised an objection against the total amount of the above dividend amount, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Despite the fact that D, the husband of the Plaintiff, embezzled KRW 150,000,000, which was the Defendant’s money, the Defendant offered a false statement of accounts to the Plaintiff, thereby threatening the Plaintiff to file a criminal complaint without having fully repaid the obligation.

The plaintiff, who was unable to make intimidation, prepared and delivered the guarantee of this case to the defendant, and followed the establishment of the right to collateral security. The guarantee of this case is null and void by an unfair legal act under Article 104 of the Civil Act, or its declaration of intention is revoked by mistake, fraud, or coercion under Articles 109 and 110 of the Civil Act.

Therefore, the instant guarantee is null and void, and the registration of creation of the instant collateral security also becomes null and void, and thus, dividends of KRW 60,000,000, which was made against the Defendant should be revoked.

B. The instant case is that Nonparty D is not liable to the Defendant, but rather liable to the Defendant.