소유권말소등기
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept the same as it is, by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, including the list of real estate and
2. The witness C’s testimony in the fifth 6-7th tier written judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed to be “the testimony of the witness C” of the witness of the court of first instance.
The 5th sentence to 16th sentence of the first instance judgment are as follows.
According to the evidence 2-2 of "B", with respect to the scope of the secured claim of the instant right to collateral security between the Plaintiff and D, the agreement on the establishment of a mortgage between the Plaintiff and D contains the following facts: "The Plaintiff shall not exceed 30,000,000 won: (a) the amount of the claims of the instant right to collateral security (which shall not exceed 30,000,000 won); (b) the obligations, such as a loan certificate, a letter of commitment, a certificate of payment, etc., signed and sealed by the Plaintiff as either the sole or joint and several obligations or guarantors who will bear or will bear in the future; and (c) all obligations arising from all bills and checks issued and endorsed as the guarantor or commercial transactions (Article 1 is printed; and (d) the Defendant shall transfer the claims of the instant right to collateral security and the Plaintiff, and notified the Plaintiff of the transfer of the claims, as seen earlier.
However, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following circumstances, namely, ① the loan of this case and the mortgage contract of this case were entered into together, and the maximum debt amount of the mortgage of this case was set at KRW 30,000,000, which is 150% of the loan of this case, and ② the Defendant demanded the preparation of a loan certificate against the borrowed money under the agreement of April 29, 199, ② the C and the Plaintiff drafted to the Defendant the loan certificate as of April 14, 2008, ③ even after the preparation of the loan certificate as of April 14, 2008. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 20614, Apr. 14, 2008>