1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The instant real estate was originally owned by the network D, and the ownership was transferred to B on November 16, 2012 due to inheritance due to the division held before December 22, 2010. On September 10, 2010, the fact that the registration of establishment of a mortgage (hereinafter “registration of this case”) was completed prior to the registration of establishment of a mortgage claim amounting to KRW 143,000,000,000 for the maximum debt amount, which the Defendant was the mortgagee (the former owner of the instant real estate) and the debtor as the mortgagee, may be recognized either by the parties to the dispute or by the evidence No. 8 and No. 1.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant asserted the Plaintiff in collusion with the deceased D or his wife B, and completed the registration of the instant mortgage in a false manner, even though there is no actual obligation or obligation.

Therefore, the mortgage registration of this case is the registration of invalidity of cause for which the secured debt is not secured.

The plaintiff seeks cancellation of the registration of the right to collateral security of this case against the defendant in subrogation of B as the creditor.

B. The Defendant alleged the Defendant completed the registration of the instant right to collateral security in order to secure the claim against the network D and the secured obligation still exists, so the registration of the instant right to collateral security cannot be cancelled.

3. There is no evidence supporting the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant registration of collateral security was invalid.

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in evidence Nos. 1 to 5, around June 2010, the Defendant provided the real estate owned by the Defendant as collateral for the loan of the network D financial institution (the preceding 1,696m2, Gimpo E) and completed the registration of the instant real estate in order to secure the claim for reimbursement, etc. arising therefrom. The Defendant terminated the contract of the instant real estate when the network D would have caused any damage to the Defendant by repaying the entire principal and interest of the financial institution, and decided to cancel the registration of the instant real estate and to cancel the registration of the instant real estate. The deceased or his heir’s principal and interest of the financial institution still remains.