1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 21, 1998, the Defendant completed the registration of creation of mortgage (hereinafter “registration of creation of mortgage of this case”) on each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the Defendant’s Intervenor (hereinafter “Supplementary Intervenor”) (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) as indicated in the separate sheet, with respect to each real estate (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”).

(A) No. 23). (b)

On September 19, 2007, the Plaintiff acquired the obligation to return the loan to the lending obligor C from the Cheongnam Agricultural Cooperative (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul Agricultural Cooperative”), and the Cheongsan notified the fact of transferring the loan to C around October 11, 2007.

(A) No. 3 123). (c)

On May 13, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a payment order with the Gwangju District Court (Seoul District Court 2015 tea7111) seeking reimbursement of KRW 66,820,535 of the loan to the Plaintiff jointly and severally against the Intervenor who is a joint and several surety and seeking reimbursement of the delayed payment damages. On the same day, the Plaintiff received the payment order from the above court to the same effect, and the said payment order was finalized as it is.

(A) Evidence Nos. 3-4 / 3-4 / [Grounds for recognition] / 123 of Evidence No. 23, 1 and 4 of Evidence No. 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the cause of the instant claim. The registration of the establishment of the instant mortgage was completed by the Defendant, without the secured debt, through a false conspiracy with the supplementary intervenor, and even if not, the secured debt was fully repaid or extinguished after the lapse of 10 years from March 30, 1999. The Plaintiff sought the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the instant mortgage.

B. The defendant and the supplementary intervenor asserted that the defendant and the supplementary intervenor borrowed KRW 18,00,000,000 from the defendant, the supplementary intervenor, in order to raise the hospital costs of the children around March 1998.