The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A. Based on the adopted evidence, the court below found that the market price of the apartment of this case was 270,000,000 won at the time of the establishment of the mortgage contract, and with respect to the apartment of this case at that time, the mortgage was established respectively for the Korea Housing Finance Corporation, the maximum debt amount of 168,000,000 (hereinafter the "mortgage 1") and the mortgage (hereinafter the "mortgage 150,000,000), and that the actual secured debt amount of the first mortgage was 158,721,40,07, and it is difficult to view that the plaintiff's fraudulent act constituted a fraudulent act within the scope of 158,721,40,000 won after deducting the secured debt amount of the mortgage from the market price of the real estate. According to the above recognition of apartment as above, the court below held that the mortgage claim of this case was no more than the total secured debt amount of 300,000 won, 207,71057,71007 won.

B. However, we cannot agree with the above judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

1. According to the records, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the 'No. 2' in the complaint of this case immediately before the establishment of the establishment of the 'No.