beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 8, 2013, Nonparty G and C borrowed KRW 17,680,000 from Nonparty G, and in order to secure the above loan obligation, Nonparty G and C entered into a mortgage contract with the amount of KRW 24,00,000 on the first floor, Yangcheon-gu Seoul, the principal’s ownership as to the mortgage-backed G and the maximum debt amount of KRW 24,00,00,00 with a view to securing the above loan obligation, and entered into the mortgage-backed registration agreement with the Seoul Southern District Court under Article 919 of the Seoul Southern District Court’s receipt on January 9, 2013 (hereinafter “the creation registration of a neighboring
(2) On April 11, 2013, the registration of creation of a mortgage was revoked on April 11, 2013 by the Seoul Southern District Court. (2) C borrowed KRW 22,892,00 from the foregoing G on January 25, 2013 to secure the above loan obligation, and entered into a mortgage agreement with the mortgagee G, the maximum debt amount of KRW 30,000,000 on January 28, 201, in order to secure the above loan obligation, the registration of creation of a mortgage was revoked on April 11, 2013. The registration of establishment of a mortgage was revoked on January 28, 2013 by the Gwangju District Court No. 15617, the registration of establishment of a mortgage (hereinafter referred to as the “registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case No. 2”). On February 13, 2013, Gwangju District Court was revoked on May 20, 2015.
3) C borrowed KRW 95,280,00 from G to G account on February 14, 2013, and KRW 12,300,000 on February 18, 2013, respectively. 4) C repaid the borrowed amount by transferring KRW 95,280,00,00 from January 15, 2013 to July 12, 2013.
5) On September 25, 2013, Nonparty J, which was affiliated with C and C, issued to G a promissory note with a face value of KRW 25,00,00,000, the place of issue, the place of payment, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the place of payment, and the date of payment, and the place of payment. C, on September 25, 2013, entered into a notary public’s authentic deed, No. 986 of the certificate of legal day written on September 2014, 2014, to the effect that, if the payment of the promissory note is delayed with G, a notary public does not raise any objection even if he/she is subject to compulsory execution. 5 G).