Whether the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage, which was made to secure the right to share in the ownership of real estate trusted to a joint purchaser, is null and void because it was made by a false conspiracy or there was no secured claim (negative)

If a real estate trusted to a co-owner after jointly purchasing it, is disposed of at will by a co-owner, or his/her shares are infringed by a co-owner due to compulsory execution by the creditor, etc., if the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage has been made to guarantee the right to claim for future conditional damages or the right to claim for return of unjust enrichment which would be held against the co-owner, it cannot be deemed as a false declaration of intent made in collusion with the intention to evade compulsory execution, and it cannot be deemed that there is no secured claim because it is a specific conditional claim to be created in the future as a secured claim.

Articles 108, 357, and 186 of the Civil Act / [title trust]

[Judgment of the court below]

Attorney Lee Dong-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Daegu District Court Decision 92Na8987 delivered on December 21, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined (the grounds of appeal stated in the additional appellate brief that the plaintiff filed after the deadline for submitting the appellate brief expires are to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief)

The court below rejected the defendant's assertion that the above real estate was owned by the non-party 1 and the non-party 2, who is the same as that of the above non-party 2, and purchased 60,000,000 won respectively and 30,000 won jointly from the above non-party 1, taking into account tax issues. The above non-party 2 purchased the above non-party 2's ownership in the register, and made the above non-party 2's ownership in the name of the above non-party 2 for the purpose of securing the above 30,000,000 won for the above real estate under the name of the non-party 2's non-party 2's own ownership or for the purpose of securing the above non-party 2's right to claim the establishment of a mortgage on the non-party 2's own share for the purpose of securing the above non-party 2's right to claim the establishment of a mortgage on the non-party 2's own share.

According to relevant evidence and records and relevant statutes, the above recognition judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and it cannot be deemed that there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on false representation of conspiracy or the legal principles on the secured debt of the right to collateral security like the theory of lawsuit, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Thus,

Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon-young (Presiding Justice)