1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings, the establishment registration of a mortgage on the attached property owned by the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the "establishment registration of a mortgage on the attached property of this case") on August 24, 1991 can be acknowledged that the establishment registration of a mortgage on the attached property owned by the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the "establishment registration of a mortgage on the attached property of this case") was completed around August 24, 191.

2. The plaintiff's assertion argues that the plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage of this case to the defendant as security of KRW 35,000,000 for the obligation to return the sale price to the defendant of this case, but C discharged the defendant's husband of this case with full repayment of KRW 35,00,000 for the secured debt of this case to D around 1993, and received documents necessary for the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage of this case from D, but failed to cancel it due to its loss.

In light of the following: (a) there is a witness C’s testimony that seems consistent with the Plaintiff’s assertion; (b) compared to the amount of the obligation to return the sale price to the Defendant, the maximum debt amount of the right to collateral security is very low; (c) financial data on KRW 35,00,000, which C paid to D was not submitted; and (d) it is difficult to understand that C received documents on the cancellation of the establishment registration of collateral security from D and lost them; and (c) it is difficult to understand that the establishment registration of collateral security of this case was completed up to the present time without being delivered the documents on the cancellation of the establishment registration of collateral security; (d) there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion; and (e) there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.