청구이의 등
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
Of the instant lawsuit, the part concerning the claim for cancellation of the mortgage contract.
On December 5, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) lent KRW 20,00,000 to the Plaintiff at an annual interest rate of 30% on the said date; and (b) the Plaintiff shall repay that amount to January 5, 2014; and (c) if the Plaintiff fails to perform the said obligation, the Plaintiff shall draw up a notarial deed of a monetary loan for consumption (Evidence 1623, 2013, hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”) stating that there is no objection even if it is immediately subject to compulsory execution.
As to the instant automobile owned by the Plaintiff on the same day, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a mortgage agreement with the Defendant, which provides that the Plaintiff shall set up a mortgage of KRW 26,00,000 with the maximum debt amount of KRW 26,00,00,000, and completed the mortgage creation registration, which caused the mortgage holder, the Defendant, the mortgagee, the obligor, and the Plaintiff, and the bond value of KRW 26,00,000, on December 5, 2013.
On April 16, 2014, the Defendant applied for the auction of automobile rent of KRW 26,000,000 with the claim amount of the instant automobile to Gwangju District Court Netcheon-Support E, based on the foregoing mortgage.
[Based on recognition, the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and the purport of the whole argument is that the plaintiff's statement of this case's notarial deed was made for the purpose of securing 20 million won because the plaintiff was unable to repay it after lending money to the defendant. Since the act of lending money which caused it constitutes illegal consideration, it is null and void in violation of Article 103 of the Civil Act. Thus, the notarial deed of this case prepared for securing it is also null and void. Therefore, compulsory execution based on the above notarial deed should not be allowed. The notarial deed of this case should be revoked, and the mortgage established for it should be cancelled.
The lawsuit of this case is the subject of judgment on the claim for cancellation of mortgage contract.