근저당권말소
1. The Plaintiff:
A. As to Defendant B’s share of 4,956.285 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, 923.84 of the real estate stated in the separate sheet.
1. The facts below the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 6.
The plaintiff is a co-owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as the "building of this case"). With respect to the share of the plaintiff 9,912.57/4,956.285 of the building of this case, the defendant B completed the registration of provisional attachment (Seoul Western District Court Decision 39049, Nov. 6, 1997; hereinafter referred to as the "registration of provisional attachment") against the defendant B's above-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage (Seoul Western District Court 39530, Aug. 23, 2002; hereinafter referred to as the "registration of provisional attachment of this case").
B. Around August 27, 1997, Defendant B entered into a lease agreement with Nonparty C on the condition that the second and third floors of the instant building from Nonparty C will be leased KRW 610,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 15,000,000, and KRW 15,000,000, and the lease term of KRW 1 year. The Defendant B completed the registration of the establishment of the instant neighboring building on the ground of the mortgage agreement concluded on November 6, 197 with respect to the instant building in order to secure the right to return the lease deposit upon the termination of the lease.
C. After the end of the lease, Defendant B did not pay rent, electricity fee, management fee, etc. during the lease period, and the overdue amount exceeded KRW 610,00,000 for the lease deposit. At the end of the lease, Defendant B was fully deducted and extinguished from the lease deposit to Defendant B.
Nevertheless, Defendant B did not implement the registration procedure for cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a new mortgage in the instant case, which was completed to secure the claim for the refund of the above lease deposit to C until now.
2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim against Defendant B.