근저당권말소
1. The defendant shall, on April 4, 2007, have the jurisdiction over the Goyang-gu Seoul District Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's 23,802 square meters of C forest land to
In fact, pursuant to the credit guarantee agreement concluded on September 30, 2009 with B on October 31, 2007, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the payment of the subrogated amount of KRW 7,283,539,958 on behalf of the NAF under the credit guarantee agreement with B on September 30, 2009, and the Seoul Central District Court 2010Ga73760 on July 13, 201, the judgment of the Plaintiff became final and conclusive around the time when “B was awarded a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff at the rate of KRW 5,058,059,059,131 and KRW 5,032,61 among them, and KRW 15% per annum from September 30, 2009 to October 15, 2010, and KRW 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.”
The real estate mentioned in Paragraph (1) of this Article (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) is owned by B. The Defendant completed the registration of creation of a collateral on January 28, 2003 with respect to the instant real estate, the obligor B and the maximum debt amount of which are KRW 2.1 billion (hereinafter “the instant contract”). The Defendant completed the registration of creation of a collateral on the instant real estate, which was completed according to the instant contract for establishment of a collateral security (hereinafter “the instant contract”).
In relation to the secured obligation which was created at the time of the instant contract to collateral security, the document stating that “the mortgagee establishes the right to collateral security in order to secure all the obligations, such as the instrument of payment, signed and sealed by the debtor as the sole or joint and several obligations or the guarantor, which are to be borne or will be borne by the creditor within the scope of the maximum debt amount, and all the obligations arising out of all the bills or checks and all the obligations arising out of commercial transactions.”
【Based on Recognition, the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the grounds for a claim as to Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, and the grounds for a claim as a whole of the pleadings is a claim for the exclusion of interference based on ownership by subrogation of B with the claim as the preserved bond.