beta
(영문) 수원지방법원평택지원 2019.01.09 2018가합8912

유치권 부존재 확인

Text

1. There is no defendant's lien on each real estate listed in the separate sheet between the plaintiff and the defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 19, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming damages equivalent to KRW 49,570,727,958 with C and D (hereinafter “D”) as a co-defendant, and was sentenced to a favorable judgment by public notice on September 8, 2017. The judgment became final and conclusive on September 26, 2017.

(Seoul Central District Court 2017Gahap534790).b

On September 14, 2017, the Plaintiff applied for a compulsory auction of real estate on each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by C and D (hereinafter “instant real estate”) based on the executory exemplification of the judgment in the above Seoul Central District Court 2017Gahap534790 case. On September 15, 2017, Suwon District Court rendered a decision to commence the auction from the Suwon District Court on September 15, 2017.

(1) This Court E, hereinafter “instant decision to commence the auction”).

Attached Form

Currently, in the building listed in the list (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”), the term “Fnaart club” is currently operated. D.

On February 13, 2018, the Defendant reported the right of retention by asserting that “A contract for construction of a Age Club facility with respect to the building in this case with C was concluded and completed construction on November 13, 2013, but did not receive construction cost of KRW 2 billion up to the present date,” in the instant compulsory auction procedure.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition; entries in Gap’s evidence 1 through 5 (including branch numbers, if any); the witness G’s testimony; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant had no possession of the real estate of this case as the lien holder prior to the registration of the entry of the decision on commencing auction of this case, and cannot be viewed as currently occupying

Furthermore, since there is no secured debt in relation to the instant real estate and there is no relation with the secured debt, a lien cannot be established for the Defendant’s real estate.

3. Determination

A. Relevant legal principles are the requirements for establishment of lien as stipulated in Article 320 of the Civil Act, and possession, which is the requirements for existence.

참조조문