청구이의
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On August 26, 2014, Company B entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Plaintiff for a loan of KRW 1,380,000,000, and from August 29, 2014 to August 29, 2017, and upon the said credit transaction agreement, Company B acquired KRW 1,380,000 against the Plaintiff, who is the representative director of Company B, on August 29, 2014.
B. On September 5, 2014, B, C, and D: (a) a notary public drafted and delivered to the Defendant a promissory note No. 166 of par value of KRW 100,000,000,000 (hereinafter “instant promissory note”).
C. In order to secure the obligation of the Promissory Notes, Co., Ltd., Ltd., on September 5, 2014, with respect to the land indicated in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) No. 39895, Sept. 5, 2014, as to the Plaintiff, Cheongju District Court’s Cheongju Branch Branch, etc., KRW 190,000,000 of the maximum debt amount, and KRW 190,000,000, and the registration of the establishment of a new mortgage as to the land indicated in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”). Furthermore, on December 29, 2014, Cheongju District Court’s Cheongju District Court’s Cheongju District Court’s 5877, Dec. 29, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage
Currently, corporation B is insolvent.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including serial numbers), evidence Nos. 10-2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The issuance of the Promissory Notes in this case was made with the Defendant, who was aware of the fact in order to avoid compulsory execution with respect to the land and building in this case owned by B without any cause of the issuance of the Promissory Notes, and thus, is invalid. Furthermore, the Plaintiff agreed to set up a right to collateral security as to the building in this case to the Plaintiff, and in violation of this provision, the Promissory Notes in this case were issued