(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2014.01.13 2012가단27434

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2014.01.13 2012가단27434

근저당권설정등기말소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The establishment registration of a mortgage (hereinafter referred to as the “establishment registration of a mortgage of this case”) was completed on May 24, 2006 on the real estate indicated in the attachment list, which was owned by the plaintiff, on May 23, 2006, due to the debtor C, the mortgagee, the defendant of the right to collateral security, the maximum debt amount of KRW 60,000,000,000.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case was void since C, which was the husband of the plaintiff, used a document related to the registration that was stolen from the plaintiff, and forged the document to establish a mortgage and completed it to the defendant.

In the event that the establishment registration of a mortgage has been completed, the registration shall be presumed to have been lawful and shall be deemed to have publicly announced the state of true rights. Therefore, the person who asserts that the registration was unlawful shall be responsible to prove the objection to the reversal of the presumption.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da72763 delivered on April 10, 2001, etc.). However, C stolen registration-related documents only with the descriptions of Gap evidence 6-1, 2, 12-1, 2, 3, and 17-1 through 6, and testimony of witness D.

It is insufficient to recognize that the document to establish a mortgage was forged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The plaintiff's assertion on this part is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff asserted that C or D, the actual debtor, repaid all the secured debt of the instant establishment registration, but it is not sufficient to acknowledge the evidence to acknowledge the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 3, 5, 7, 8-2, 10-1, 2, and 16, and witness evidence Nos. 16, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

This part of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2014.04.29 2013나2792

-서울북부지방법원 2017.10.31 2017가단108186

-창원지방법원 2017.01.19 2016가단113194

-서울고등법원 2015.09.25 2015나3305

-대전지방법원논산지원 2015.06.18 2015가단1195