가등기의말소등기절차이행청구
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasons for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (a) the Plaintiffs added “2. Additional Determination” as to the assertion that the Plaintiffs stressed or added to this court; and (b) the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance (including the attached list) are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the addition or modification as follows.
In accordance with Section 14 of the first instance judgment, “In order to secure the obligation for the payment of a contract to J Co., Ltd.,” and thereafter, “The Defendant shall complete the principal registration on September 4, 2017 on the ground of sale and purchase as of August 31, 2017 on the basis of the above provisional registration on September 4, 2017,” each entry and statement of Section 1, 2, 4, 8 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)” in Section 1, 2, 4, 8, 6, each entry of Section 1, 2, 4, 8, 6 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the testimony, testimony, and testimony of the witness of K of this court,” as follows.
2. Additional determination
A. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence and the entire purport of the pleading revealed prior to whether the Defendant could be deemed to have transferred the right to collateral security to E, namely, ① the witness E of the first instance court did not state that the Defendant would cancel the registration of the right to collateral security under the name of the principal to the building of this case even if the registration of the right to collateral security is cancelled, it should be said that the Defendant would be able to believe that it would fall short of his/her match without any need for new use, and on June 12, 2015, that the Defendant applied for voluntary auction of the building of this case on the basis of the right to collateral security under the name of the principal to the building of this case was not directly applied for. ② The Defendant did not notify E of the transfer of the right to collateral security at the time of transferring the right to collateral security on the building of this case to E; ③ The representative director of the first instance court, who was a debtor D, was the debtor D, as above.