부당이득금
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On December 21, 2007, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant share”) owned 746/22913 of the land size 22913 square meters of land size D 22913 square meters of land size (hereinafter “instant share”). As to the instant share ownership, the instant share was established on December 21, 2007 with the maximum amount of debt amount of KRW 90,000,000, the debtor FF, and the Defendants of the right to collateral security as the Defendants on December 21, 2007.
(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). B.
As to the shares owned in the instant case, G, a subordinate mortgagee, applied for a voluntary auction on the shares owned in the instant case, and thereby, was distributed KRW 90,000,000 as a mortgagee in the distribution procedure thereafter to the Defendants.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, 6, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Assertion and determination
A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion appears to have died before the instant lawsuit was filed.
The Defendant, without the Plaintiff’s consent, established the right of representation on the instant shares in the name of the Defendants with respect to the ownership of the instant shares, and thus, the instant right of collateral is null and void, and the Defendants unjustly gained dividends on the ground that the said right is null and void, and thus, are obligated to return KRW 90,000 to each Plaintiff.
B. 1) The real estate registration itself is presumed to have been completed by legitimate grounds for registration, and is held liable to assert and prove the grounds for invalidation in light of the above legal doctrine (see Supreme Court Decision 95Da39526, Sept. 30, 1997). 2)
F Without the Plaintiff’s consent, the health care unit for the Defendants without permission, and the health care unit for the instant case in which F had already died, the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 3-5, 8, and 9, and the witness H’s testimony are sufficient to recognize.