(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.03.28 2018가단14410

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) 의정부지방법원 2019.03.28 2018가단14410

사해행위취소 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 10, 2017, D borrowed KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff, and caused the Plaintiff to have the registration right certificate of the real estate stated in the attached list in C’s name (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

After that, D borrowed additional amounts of KRW 120 million from the Plaintiff on June 23, 2017, KRW 5 million on June 24, 2017, KRW 5 million on June 25, 2017, KRW 5 million on June 25, 2017, and KRW 500,000 on June 26, 2017, and written a letter of borrowing to repay each of the above amounts of KRW 120 million until September 30, 2017.

B. On September 20, 2017, the Defendant entered into a mortgage agreement with C as to the instant real estate and with the Defendant as a mortgagee (hereinafter “mortgage agreement”) with the maximum debt amount of KRW 80 million, the Defendant as a mortgagee, and completed the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage”) as of September 20, 2017, the Namyang-ju registry office of the Jung-gu District Court received on September 20, 2017.

C. On November 16, 2017, the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage under the name of the Plaintiff”) with respect to the instant real estate was completed, which was the maximum debt amount of KRW 120 million, the debtor D, and the Plaintiff as the mortgagee.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was known to C as the surety and lent KRW 120 million to D. It constitutes a fraudulent act against the Plaintiff to conclude the instant mortgage contract with the Defendant regarding the instant real estate, which is one of its sole property, in collusion with D and the Defendant, and complete the registration of establishment of a mortgage on the instant real estate.

Therefore, the mortgage contract of this case should be revoked, and the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of the mortgage establishment registration of this case to the plaintiff.

3. The following facts are considered in full view of the evidence mentioned above and the facts admitted.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.10.18 2017가단525780

-대구지방법원 2015.06.17 2013나15515

-대전지방법원 2016.09.06 2015가단217970

-춘천지방법원 2018.10.04 2017가단54476

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2015.10.06 2015나5139