1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff owns each of the instant land.

B. On May 29, 2017, the Defendant owned the Suwon-gu Seoul Building D head (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant commercial building on May 17, 2017 to E.

C. On May 29, 2017, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the creation of the instant right to collateral security (the Plaintiff) with respect to each of the instant land, on the grounds of the mortgage contract concluded on May 17, 2017, the maximum debt amount of KRW 520 million, and the registration of the creation of the instant right to collateral security (the Plaintiff)

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-4, Eul evidence Nos. 1-3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was F to promote an exchange contract on the instant commercial building and the instant detached house located in Pyeongtaek-si G owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “G detached house”).

Accordingly, the Defendant (Agent F) and E agreed to pay KRW 450 million to the Defendant by June 2017, when the Defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the instant commercial building first, E obtained a loan from a third party as collateral for the said commercial building, and thereby engaged in the processing and sale of Aluminium, iron, etc.

In addition, on May 2017, when the Plaintiff and the Defendant (Agent F) set up the instant right to collateral security to the Defendant, the Defendant paid KRW 450 million to the Defendant to the Defendant during the middle of June 2017, and upon paying the said money, the Defendant agreed to sell the instant right to collateral security to the Defendant at the same time the Plaintiff sold the instant right to collateral security to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

However, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff KRW 450,000,000,000,000 as stipulated in the instant agreement, to the Lieutenant on June 2017.

The Plaintiff rescinds the instant agreement on the grounds of the Defendant’s breach of duty.

Therefore, the defendant registers the establishment of the right to collateral security of this case to the plaintiff following the cancellation of the agreement.