1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On October 23, 1999, the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage was completed in the name of the Korea Development Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Mediation Bank”) under the name of the debtor E, with respect to the registration of ownership transfer under C on October 23, 1999 (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”). On April 7, 2003, the maximum debt amount was KRW 45,500,000, and the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage in the name of the Korea Development Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Mediation Bank”) where the debtor is E (hereinafter “the debtor”).

(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). B.

The Daiung Bank loaned KRW 34,000,000 as security the instant collateral, and the title holder was E.

C. The title holder of the instant loan was changed to F on April 7, 2004, and on April 27, 2005, the Defendant was changed to the right to collateral security, and on April 7, 2005, the registration of change of the right to collateral security made the debtor F on the same day due to the takeover of the instant contract on April 7, 2004 (the registration of change of the right to collateral security was completed immediately following the following day as the debtor F) and the registration of change of the right to collateral security made the debtor as the defendant was completed on April 28, 2005 due to the takeover of the contract on April 27, 2005.

C had the Plaintiff, G, and H as their children, and I and J as their children.

E. G died on March 10, 2006, while C died on March 26, 2006, respectively.

F. On April 10, 2006, the Plaintiff repaid the amount of KRW 34,051,698 (the principal = 34,000,000 + delayed interest of KRW 51,698), which is the full amount of the secured debt with respect to the instant right to collateral security, to the Cho Ho Bank.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 3, witness F's testimony, witness E's partial testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff and H inherited the apartment of this case in proportion to the shares of 1/3, G's i/6 each due to the death of C, and the plaintiff and H inherited the apartment of this case in proportion to the shares of 1/6. The plaintiff succeeded to the apartment of this case while succeeding to the apartment of this case. Thus, the defendant, the title holder of the loan of this case, has no special circumstances.