Main Issues

A petition for invalidation of a security agreement and the burden of proof on the basis of the debtor's rashion and fluence

Summary of Judgment

The presumption of the value of the collateral and the ratio of the amount of the credit is based on the fact that the ratio of the credit amount is reached and extremely imbalanced, and in conclusion of the contract, the presumption of it without any evidence is a misunderstanding of legal principles as to the burden of proof and an incomplete hearing.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 90 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

Kim Jong-si

Defendant-Appellee

Normal heading

Judgment of the lower court

Gwangju District Court Decision 58No96 delivered on July 30, 1958, the second instance Gwangju High Court Decision 58No96 delivered on July 30, 1958

Reasons

According to the judgment of the court below, if the value of collateral and the ratio of the amount of credit are exceeded, and if it is extremely infinite, the court below presumed the debtor's ability to take the initiative or urgent difficulties in executing the contract by itself, and presumed the plaintiff to have entered into the contract on the original basis, and concluded that the contract was null and void for the violation of the official grain, while the court below ruled the plaintiff's failure to take the part in the contract, the issue of whether the plaintiff was the plaintiff's failure to take the part in the defendant's finite, etc. when entering into the contract on the present case, is the burden of proof in the defendant's assertion of the difference, and cannot be presumed as the price infinite itself. However, the court below's presumption of the difference as to the facts requiring proof without evidence should be misunderstanding the legal principles as to the burden of proof and further erred in the incomplete hearing.