1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part regarding the cancellation of the contract to establish a mortgage dated March 25, 2014 is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 23, 2008, the Plaintiff and A issued the first credit guarantee certificate by setting the coverage amount of KRW 120,000,000, and the term of guarantee on April 22, 2009; and the second credit guarantee certificate by setting the coverage amount of KRW 180,000,000 on April 27, 2009; and the term of guarantee of KRW 26,010 on April 26, 2010. (2) A received a loan from an enterprise bank as security; (3) A received a loan from the enterprise bank on June 20, 2014; and (4) A notified the Plaintiff of the guarantee accident; and the Plaintiff subrogated for KRW 287,398,117 to the enterprise bank on September 30, 2014.

3) The sum of the amount of subrogated, etc. not recovered by the Plaintiff as of the date of the closing of the instant argument is KRW 285,359,677 (i.e., KRW 670, KRW 120,731,856, KRW 670, KRW 270, KRW 164,627,151). The delayed damage rate under the agreement is 12% per annum. (ii) A’s disposal of property 1) on March 25, 2014, set up a collateral security (hereinafter “instant collateral security”) against the Defendant with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list, which is the only responsible property (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as of March 25, 2014.

2) A sells the instant real estate to the Defendant on May 19, 2014, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

A. After the establishment of the instant real estate, foreign exchange banks and maximum debt amount of KRW 187,200,000, which were established on the instant real estate, were cancelled, respectively.

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The exclusion period of the lawsuit of this case and the defendant asserted that the cancellation part of the mortgage contract of this case among the lawsuit of this case was unlawful since the creditor, who is the exclusion period under Article 406(2) of the Civil Act, raised one year after he became aware of the cause of cancellation.

B. In exercising the right of revocation, the "date when the creditor, which is the starting point of the exclusion period, becomes aware of the cause of revocation" means that the creditor becomes aware of the requirement of the right of revocation.