beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.01 2016가단5297764

제권판결에대한불복청구의소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Promissory notes as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant promissory notes”) were drawn up by a notary public at the commission of the Plaintiff and the Defendant in the No. 1040 on the B/Dong Legal Office No. 2013 (hereinafter “instant notarial deeds”).

B. On March 2015, the Defendant filed a report on the loss of a promissory note stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) on the ground that it was lost while being kept in an unsound place. On July 23, 2015, the Defendant filed an application for a public summons with this Court No. 2015KaKa3019 on the ground of the said loss.

C. On January 25, 2016, the instant Promissory Notes rendered a judgment of nullification (hereinafter “instant judgment of nullification”) with respect to the instant Promissory Notes, inasmuch as no interested party’s report was filed in the relevant procedures of the public summons.

The Plaintiff currently holds the Promissory Notes and the authentic copy of the Notarial Deed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is not the loss of the Promissory Notes, but the Defendant returned them to C, who is the Plaintiff’s husband, at the end of July, 2013, and was aware that the Plaintiff was legally holding the Promissory Notes, but the Plaintiff applied for a public summons as if it was lost by falsity or in an unlawful manner. Thus, the instant nullification judgment was revoked, and the Defendant’s application for a nullification judgment should be dismissed.

3. Determination

A. The holder of the relevant legal instruments or certificates lost the possession of securities, etc. without resorting to his/her own intent.

Even if it is cancelled that a certain person holds securities, etc. thereafter, the former holder shall demand the return of the securities, etc. to the present holder, and the public summons against this is not allowed.