근저당권말소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the Defendant’s additional determination as to the assertion emphasized or added by this court, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is by the main text of
2. The addition of judgment;
A. The defendant alleged that the real estate of this case was purchased as the revenue and loan acquired by C and trusted the real estate to B. However, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that C trusted the real estate of this case to B, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently, the defendant's above assertion is not acceptable.
B. The Defendant asserts to the effect that B is a joint obligor of the instant borrowed money obligation based on the responsibility for daily household affairs, or as a guarantee for C’s obligation.
In light of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the act of borrowing the loan of this case does not seem to constitute a juristic act related to daily home affairs ( even in the testimony of the witness C and the testimony of witness B of the court of first instance, it is recognized that C borrowed money from the defendant as the material price, and even if C actually used part of the borrowed money after receiving the borrowed money from the defendant, it is difficult to view that the act of borrowing the borrowed money of this case constitutes a juristic act related to daily home affairs solely on the circumstance that C actually used it as a part of the borrowed money in daily home affairs) as well as the evidence submitted by the defendant is insufficient to recognize that B is the joint debtor of the borrowed money of this case or guaranteed the obligation of C, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
C. The Defendant’s instant loan claim constitutes an indefinite-term claim with a deadline for success C in the re-term, and its extinctive prescription has not yet expired until now.