근저당권설정등기말소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of premise;
A. On February 7, 2006, the Solomon Savings Bank filed a lawsuit against Hosan Construction Co., Ltd. and C for the claim for the amount of the transfer income, and the judgment was finalized on February 7, 2006, that “C shall jointly and severally pay to Solomon Savings Bank KRW 123,443,197 and KRW 66,988,86 among them to Solomon Savings Bank, and C shall pay damages for delay within the limit of KRW 1,300,000,000,000.”
B. Solomon Savings Bank Co., Ltd. on April 26, 201
Around that time, the claim was transferred to the Plaintiff, and the notice of transfer was given to C.
C. As to the 1053 square meters prior to Jindo-gun B (hereinafter “the instant real property”), Jin-gun registry office of the Gwangju District Court (the maximum debt amount of KRW 50,000,000, the debtor C, and the mortgagee as the defendant on December 10, 2004) completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage with respect to the 1053 square meters prior to Jindo-gun B (hereinafter “instant real property”).
(hereinafter referred to as “instant collateral security”). [Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4, and Eul evidence 5, the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Judgment on the invalidity of the instant mortgage contract
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion argues that, at the time of concluding the instant mortgage contract, the establishment of the right to collateral security amounting to KRW 50,000,000,000, the officially announced value of the instant real estate was not 4,443,660 won is invalid as a false declaration of conspiracy to evade compulsory execution.
B. According to the evidence evidence No. 1) No. 3, the Defendant’s act of establishing the instant collateral security right is recognized as having the officially announced value of the instant real estate at the time of entering into the instant collateral security contract with C. However, in light of the following circumstances, namely, that the Defendant lent KRW 150,00,000 to C and set up the instant collateral security right in part of the real estate acquired as joint collateral, solely on the basis of the fact that the Defendant set up the instant collateral security right.