logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.06.01 2017나56117
근저당권말소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment is as follows, except for the addition of the judgment as to the allegations added by the plaintiff to this court as set forth in the following 2. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. The further determination of this Court

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that G imported scam in the name of the Defendant Intervenor (mutualJ). Of the sales proceeds of KRW 94,424,00,00 paid by the Defendant Intervenor on behalf of G, KRW 64,424,00,00 paid directly to the importer, and the remainder of KRW 30,000,000 was agreed upon with G to be used to repay the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security. Accordingly, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 30,000 to the Defendant’s Scam E through the Plaintiff’s her husband’s her her her her her her her her her her her her hersscam, the Plaintiff fully repaid the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security.

Even if L, a wife of G, transferred KRW 20 million from the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor on August 1, 201, to E immediately, the Plaintiff paid KRW 20 million out of the secured debt of the instant collateral security. In accordance with the agreement, the Plaintiff repaid KRW 20 million out of the secured debt of the instant case.

B. According to the evidence Nos. 4 and 7 evidence A, G is recognized as a fact that G received the Defendant’s Intervenor’s name (mutual JJ rap import, and the Defendant’s Intervenor received total KRW 94,424,000 from the Defendant’s sales agent on July 26, 201 and July 29, 201.

However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 6, the defendant acquiring intervenor from the sales agency immediately after receiving the above money from G as above, the same year from July 26, 201 upon the request of G

8.6. It is recognized that the sum of KRW 91,488,160 was transferred to the customs office, G’s ancillary M, G’s wife L, etc. by dividing the total amount of KRW 91,48,160 between June 1, 200. According to the above recognized facts, the Defendant takeover intervenor did clock in his name upon the request

arrow