beta
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2018.07.25 2017나51072

근저당권말소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

3. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a special purpose company established under the Asset-Backed Securitization Act (hereinafter “Asset-Backed Securitization Act”) in order to conduct the national business called “d banks”.

B. On November 4, 1993, C obtained a loan of KRW 10,00,00 from Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul Surety Life Insurance Co., Ltd.”) as collateral for a small loan of KRW 10,00,00 from the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul Guarantee Insurance”). On the same day (C’s failure to pay a loan to Samsung Bio-resources) and the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd guaranteed the indemnity liability that C bears to Samsung Life Insurance when it pays the insurance money to Samsung Life.

C. Since then C failed to pay the principal and interest of Samsung Bio-resources, Samsung Bio-resources received KRW 10,703,423 of the insurance money from the Seoul Guarantee Insurance on September 26, 1995 upon receiving insurance money from the Seoul Guarantee Insurance, and on October 5, 2000, Seoul Guarantee Insurance filed a claim for reimbursement against C and B, and “C and B jointly pay jointly and severally the amount of KRW 19,208,390 and the amount of KRW 10,703,423 calculated at the rate of 19% per annum from August 23, 199 to the date of full payment.” The above judgment was finalized on November 4, 200.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant claim”) a claim established by the above judgment is D.

On May 13, 2005, the Plaintiff acquired the claim of this case from the Seoul Guarantee Insurance, and notified C of the assignment of the claim to C on June 16, 2005 by means of content-certified mail, and the notification reached C around that time.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant claim”). (e) The instant claim after the assignment of the claim is made.

As a result, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C and B for the interruption of the extinctive prescription of the instant claim for the transfer-price, the decision of performance recommendation with respect to C and B (hereinafter “instant performance recommendation decision”) on September 15, 2010 became final and conclusive.