beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.13 2016가단5128585

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's primary claim is dismissed.

2. The conjunctive claim of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff had a claim of KRW 1.1 billion against B, including usage fees of KRW 1.1 billion against B, but the said claim was transferred to the Cheongju District Court (Cheongju District Court Decision 2002Gahap837, Jun. 21, 2002). The said claim was transferred to the KNH Loan Co., Ltd., Ltd., and the KNEL Loan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “KEL Loan”).

KEL loan received a favorable judgment of KRW 100 million and damages for delay in a lawsuit against B, etc. (Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2012Da43670 decided Oct. 17, 2012; hereinafter the above judgment claim referred to as “instant claim”), and transferred the instant claim to the Plaintiff.

On December 16, 2016, the Plaintiff transferred the instant bonds and all rights incidental thereto to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, and the notification of the transfer reached B on January 16, 2017.

B. A provisional registration of the right to claim for ownership transfer registration of the Defendant’s name and the Plaintiff’s provisional registration B, with respect to the instant real estate, completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale as of April 15, 2014 in his/her own name, and completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale as of May 27, 2014, and completed the provisional registration on June 3, 2014 to the Defendant on June 2, 2014 (hereinafter “instant trade reservation”).

(hereinafter “Provisional Registration of this case.” With respect to the instant real estate, the Plaintiff received a decision of provisional seizure on November 18, 2014, which is the claim amounting to KRW 100 million ( Daejeon District Court 2014Kadan51314), and the registration of provisional seizure was completed on the same day.

(hereinafter referred to as the “registration of provisional seizure of this case”).

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the instant provisional registration against the Defendant, thereby winning the judgment (Seoul District Court Decision 2014Da46195 Decided July 21, 2015), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on August 6, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as "related fraudulent act revocation lawsuit").

D. The defendant's principal registration.