beta
(영문) 부산고등법원 2019.09.05 2018나56988

가등기말소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) the judgment of the court of first instance is to be concluded or added as set forth in paragraph (2); and (b) the Defendant’s repeated or new arguments are identical to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the judgment as set forth in paragraph (3) below; and (c) thus, it is acceptable as it is in accordance with

2. Part II written or added "C and D" shall be written by "C and their wife" and "C".

2. The 9th executive officer "the defendant" shall be appointed to "the defendant who is the Cho Jong-man of D".

2. The 12th parallel "D" shall be added to "D and G".

3. 5 pages "(including those with serial numbers)" shall be divided into "(including those with serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)".

3rd 17th 3rd 17th 17th 200, "the defendant has been put to C after March 200."

In 3rd 21, "each evidence mentioned above" has been written with "each evidence mentioned above, Gap evidence 3 through 7, Eul evidence 2 through Eul evidence 4."

4. On the other hand, “no effect” is added to “no effect” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 79Da239, May 22, 1979; 2018Da200730, Nov. 29, 2018).

4. 6 pages 6. The following shall be added:

If C borrowed funds from the Defendant from March 200 to June 18, 2003 to the Defendant’s assertion, and established the provisional registration of this case to the Defendant for the purpose of collateral, the provisional registration should have been made at the latest by the time when H association’s cancellation of the right to collateral security ( June 18, 2003). 4 pages 13 of “The following shall be added:

[4] From March 200, the Defendant did not state the specific period, amount, interest, and maturity agreement, etc. of the loan, and did not submit related data, arguing that from around March 200, the Defendant lent C a total of KRW 300 million to C with the H association mortgage loan repayment funds.

5..