beta
Text
1. The defendant is based on the Act on Mortgage on Mortgage on the Land in Bocheon-si B, C, and D.
Reasons
1. The Defendant, as a mortgagee on the land located in Macheon-si B, C, and D, filed an application for voluntary auction with the Korean District Court E on October 1, 2014, which added the list No. 13699 on April 11, 2014 to the list No. 2013-166 of the List of Article 6 of the Act on Mortgage on Factories and Mining Foundations (Notice No. 27298, Jul. 17, 2013), and Article 2013-167 of the List of Article 2013-16 of the Act on Mortgage on Factories and Mining Foundations (Notice No. 27299, Jul. 17, 2013). The decision to commence voluntary auction on October 2, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. On June 13, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant machinery is owned by the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff purchased the machinery and equipment listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant machinery”) from a new company (hereinafter “non-party company”) in the purchase price of KRW 200 million from the non-party company (hereinafter “non-party company”). The Defendant asserted that the instant machinery is owned by the Plaintiff, and that it is not owned by the Plaintiff, but owned by the non-party company.
3. In full view of the written evidence Nos. 1, 4-1, 2, 3, and 5-1, 5-2, 6-1, 6-1, and 6-1 of the evidence Nos. 4-2, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of this court’s order to submit financial transaction information to the same branch of the corporate bank, the non-party company, around June 5, 2013, sold the instant machinery to the Plaintiff and raised funds for the purchase of the land and its factory buildings located in Scheon-si B, C, and D from F around June 5, 2013. The non-party company sold the instant machinery to the Plaintiff around that time. The Plaintiff sold the instant machinery to the non-party company around June 5, 2013. The non-party company used it as the purchase price for the said real estate, etc., and used it again from the Plaintiff at that time.