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 for the court’s explanation as to this part of the facts is as follows, except where “the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “the establishment registration”) is deemed as “the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage” and “the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage following the establishment of a mortgage (hereinafter “the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage”)” among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, and as such, this part is identical to the corresponding part of the registration. Therefore, it is cited pursuant to the main
2. The parties' assertion
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant right to collateral security does not exist at the beginning, or that the instant right to collateral security does not coincide with the obligor of the instant right to collateral security, the obligor of the secured obligation, the obligee of the secured obligation, and the mortgagee of the secured obligation, and even if there
Even if all are satisfied or extinctive prescription is completed and terminated.
Therefore, in order to preserve the claim against B, the Plaintiff seeks the Defendant to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of the establishment registration of the instant neighboring mortgage in subrogation of B, which is insolvent.
B. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant’s husband D loaned KRW 20 million to B, a company’s husband D, a corporation, with its operating funds, up to August 197, and KRW 40 million up to August 29, 1997, and KRW 60 million on August 29, 1997, and as such, it was established to secure interest on the above loans and KRW 60 million.
After that, the defendant's side additionally lent to B an amount equivalent to KRW 12 million on April 28, 1998, and KRW 10 million on May 1, 190 of the same year. The above, ①, ②, ③, and ④ all loans were issued a promissory note or a check equivalent to the loans, but the above amount of the bill or check was not paid.
In addition, if the defendant found, B approved the debt of each of the above loans by paying 200,000 won or 300,000 won in cash or by paying in kind such as uniforms or labs, etc., and the progress of the extinctive prescription was suspended.