beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.04.08 2015나2075115

배당이의

Text

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.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is reasonable, except for the following modified portions, and thus, citing the reasoning of the judgment by this decision.

▣ 제1심판결 제2쪽 아래에서 8행 ‘455,500,000원’을 ‘455,000,000원’으로 수정 ▣ 제1심판결 제3쪽 5행 ‘P’을 ‘H’로 수정

2. The plaintiffs asserted that the appellate court also transferred the full amount of the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security to Q Q on December 26, 201, and accordingly, on January 30, 201, the supplementary registration of the transfer of collateral security in Q’s name was completed from the defendant on the ground of the transfer of confirmed claim on December 26, 2011, with respect to the land A on December 30, 201, since each of the instant lands (M, N,O land), K, and L’s establishment registration in the name of the defendant on each of the instant lands (M, N,O land) and the instant land became null and void due to the lack of secured debt due to the said transfer of claim.

(2) In other words, if the supplementary registration of the transfer of the right to collateral security under Q’s name was not the registration of partial transfer of the right to collateral security, as alleged by the Defendant, the supplementary registration of the transfer of the right to collateral security should be stated in the additional registration of the transfer of the right to collateral security in accordance with Article 20121-1-3 of the registration precedent, “the method in which one of the multiple collateral security holders applies for the registration of partial transfer of the right to collateral security on the ground of the transfer of the right to collateral security,” and there is no such indication, and the supplementary registration of the transfer of the right to collateral security should have been separated from the first land and the remainder of the secured real estate (K, L, M, N,O). Therefore, the supplementary registration of the transfer of the right to collateral security should be deemed to have been completed as to the whole of

However, the instant case is not only a case where one of the multiple collateral security holders transfers his claim, but also a case where the supplementary registration of the transfer of Q Q’s right to collateral security was violated in the foregoing registration example.