동산인도 청구의 소
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff the movable property listed in the attached sheet.
2. The total cost of the lawsuit.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 25, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a facility leasing agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) with respect to the 600 tons presses listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant machinery”) as follows. The Plaintiff installed the instant machinery in Yangsan-si D, a factory, and completed the inspection report on the same day.
The name of lease: presses/E acquisition cost: 380,000,000 won: F (G) location: H/D lease period: 48 months: 130,000,000 won: 1,520,000 won (1~3 times), 6,601,700 won (4-48 times)
B. On October 28, 2016, the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) loaned facility costs to C on the part of October 28, 2016, and added the machinery and equipment pursuant to Article 6 of the Act on Mortgage on Factory and Mining Foundation, including the instant machinery, to the object of existing right to collateral security.
(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). On April 25, 2018, the Intervenor obtained a decision to commence voluntary auction on the instant machinery, etc. based on the instant collateral security from the Ulsan District Court I on April 25, 2018 and continued the auction procedure.
C. On September 4, 2018, when the above auction procedure was in progress, the Intervenor entered into a contract with J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “J”) on the acquisition of assets with respect to C, including the above collateral loans and the instant collateral security. D.
On September 27, 2018, the Defendant, as a special purpose company established under the Asset-Backed Securitization Act, acquired the status of purchaser under the above asset acquisition agreement from J on the part of the Intervenor and registered it with the Financial Supervisory Service, thereby acquiring the instant mortgage on the instant machinery, etc. and possessing the instant machinery.
E. On the other hand, around December 20, 2017, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on the ground that C had lost the benefit of time due to delayed payment of lease fees.
[Ground of recognition] There is no dispute.