구상금등
1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.
2. The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case against the defendant.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the underlying facts is as follows: (a) inasmuch as the reasoning for this court’s explanation is the same as that of the relevant part, other than referring “Defendant B&T ethyl” to “Defendant Hyundai B&T ethyl”; and (b) in accordance with the main sentence of Article
2. The plaintiff asserts that each of the instant mortgage agreements concluded on November 5, 2009 with respect to each of the instant real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) was a fraudulent act, and that the original state of the agreement constituted a fraudulent act, and that the original state of the agreement was restored to the original state against the defendant as to each of the instant real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the separate sheet No. 48870, which was received on November 6, 2009, the Changwon District Court Msan registry office, and the registration procedure for cancellation of the registration of the establishment of each of the instant real estate, which was completed on November 6, 2009 with respect to each of the real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the separate sheet No. 48873, Nov. 6, 2009, the plaintiff sought that the registration procedure for cancellation of the establishment of each of the instant real estate was completed as to each of the instant real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “B”).
In the course of a lawsuit seeking the implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage, if the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage was cancelled on the ground of a successful bid, there is no legal interest in seeking the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage (Supreme Court Decision 2002Da57904 Decided January 10, 203). According to the statements in the evidence No. 20-1 and No. 20-2, each of the instant units of the instant units of the establishment registration was cancelled on December 22, 201 by the sale of each of the instant units of each of the instant units of the establishment registration, and no legal interest in seeking the execution of registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a
Therefore, this part of the lawsuit by the plaintiff is illegal and dismissed.
3. Requests for the revocation of fraudulent act.