1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendants’ establishment of the right to collateral security on the instant real estate 1) The Defendants are in the process of operating the hospital in a partnership with Nonparty E (hereinafter “E”).

(C) The 10th G of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F Building No. 10 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) was jointly owned by each one half of the shares on August 11, 2011.

(2) On October 13, 2016, the Defendants concluded a contract on July 28, 2016 to lend KRW 500,000 to H, and the Defendants signed a joint and several surety agreement with H, with the non-party H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) and the Plaintiff on July 28, 2016. In addition, on September 9, 2016, the Plaintiff leased KRW 30,000,000 to H, and the Defendants signed a joint and several surety agreement with H, and additionally, the Defendants leased KRW 30,00,000 to H, and the Defendants signed a joint and several surety agreement with H.

Accordingly, on August 1, 2016, the Defendants respectively set up the right to collateral security with respect to the instant real estate as the Plaintiff, the maximum debt amount of KRW 650,000,000, and the debtor H, the right to collateral security with respect to the instant real estate, the Plaintiff of the said right, the maximum debt amount of KRW 450,000,000, and the debtor H.

(hereinafter “each of the instant mortgages”). (b)

On May 5, 2017, the Defendants filed an application for commencement of each rehabilitation procedure with Seoul Rehabilitation Court 2017dan10068 (Defendant C) and the court 2017dan10070 (Defendant B) (Defendant B) on May 5, 2017. On September 25, 2017, the aforementioned court rendered a decision to commence each rehabilitation procedure, to authorize each rehabilitation plan on September 25, 2017, and to terminate each rehabilitation procedure on November 21, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “each rehabilitation procedure of this case”).

(2) Under each of the above rehabilitation procedures, the Plaintiff’s principal of H-related joint and several liability claim 283,406,898 won against the Defendants: