logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.01.19 2017나25781
근저당권말소등기 회복등기절차 이행 청구
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the further determination as to the assertion added by the defendant in this court, and therefore, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence

2. Additional determination

A. The defendant asserts that the registration of the establishment of a mortgage of this case cannot be completed since the plaintiff was voluntarily cancelled.

Where a registration of cancellation is cancelled unlawfully, registration that causes the same effect as that that was retroactively at the time of cancellation by restoring the cancelled registration, and registration that was cancelled unlawfully includes the substantive reasons, such as invalidation or cancellation of the grounds for registration of cancellation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da112350, Mar. 14, 2013). In light of the following, D’s acquisition of the instant right to collateral security held by the Plaintiff within the extent of subrogation, as a matter of law, within the extent of subrogation, the Plaintiff has no right to the instant right as to the instant right to collateral security within the extent of subrogation.

Since the registration of cancellation of the instant right to collateral security made by the Plaintiff is null and void within the above scope, it constitutes an unlawful cancellation registration that is subject to the registration of cancellation.

The Plaintiff cannot be viewed as having voluntarily cancelled the instant right to collateral security.

B. The defendant asserts that the registration of cancellation is unlawful only within the scope of subrogation, and the part of registration of cancellation in excess thereof is legitimate, so the registration of restoration should be limited to the part of cancellation which is unlawful.

Since the registration is for the purpose of extinguishing the whole of the registration, the registration is for the purpose of extinguishing the registration, and where part of the registered matters is illegal, it is merely an object of the registration of change or correction and is not subject to cancellation.

Of the instant collateral security, the part exceeding the scope of the transfer to D.

arrow