beta
(영문) 수원지방법원평택지원 2020.08.19 2019가합12635

유치권 부존재 확인

Text

Attached Form

The defendants' lien does not exist as to each real estate indicated in the indication of real estate.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. In order to secure a loan to the Plaintiff, Nonparty H completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on each real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) with respect to each real estate indicated in the separate sheet as follows.

Maximum debt amount of the debtor H 900,000,000 Won District Court of Ansan Branch of the 2,600,000 Suwon District Court of November 28, 2008 (No. 51573) received on November 28, 2008, No. 51574, Nov. 28, 2008; No. 1,200,000,000 Suwon Branch of the Masung Branch of the Masung Branch of the Masung Branch of the Masung Branch of the Masung Branch of the Mari District of November 28, 208

B. On November 8, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction with respect to each of the instant real estate (U.S. District Court Sejong District Court I), and on November 9, 2018, on each of the instant real estate, the registration of the decision to commence voluntary auction (hereinafter “decision to commence the auction of this case”).

Defendants’ amount (won) Defendant A92,800,000 Defendant B 11,000,000 Defendant C 343,900,000 Defendant D 60,000,000 Defendant E28,000,000 Defendant F 81,800,000,000 Defendant G 867,484,939

C. In the above auction case, the Defendants submitted a lien report with the following contents.

[Ground for recognition] Defendant G: Confession (Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act). The remainder of the Defendants: The absence of dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to Defendant G

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act (a judgment made by a person who is deemed as a foreigner);

3. Determination as to the remaining Defendants

A. In a case where the obligor acquired a lien by transferring the possession of the construction price to the creditor in respect of the said real estate after a compulsory decision on commencement of auction has been completed, such as a building owned by the obligor and owned by the obligor, after the seizure became effective, the transfer of such possession constitutes an act of disposal likely to reduce the exchange value of the object, and thus, pursuant to Articles 92(1) and 83(4) of the Civil Execution Act.