beta
Text
1. The notarial deed No. 1648, No. 2017, No. 1648, which was issued by the defendant against Taeok Co., Ltd.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 31, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased corporeal movables listed in the separate sheet in Ulsan-gun C (hereinafter “instant corporeal movables”) from the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant corporeal movables, in the amount of KRW 35 million. The instant corporeal movables were to be used in the said place. The instant corporeal movables were to be used in the said place.
B. On September 18, 2017, Taeduk Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seoul”) drafted a notarial deed as stated in Paragraph (1) of this Article, which contains the content that a security right on the instant corporeal movables is created in order to recognize a loan obligation of KRW 20 million to the Defendant and to secure the said obligation.
C. The Defendant seized the instant corporeal movables on the basis of the above notarial deed against the public morals.
[Basis] Evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Evidence No. 5-1, 2, Evidence No. 6, Evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, and 2 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. The plaintiff asserts that the corporeal movables of this case are owned by the plaintiff, and that the defendant's compulsory execution against the corporeal movables of this case should not be permitted on the basis of a notarial deed against the public morals.
B. On October 31, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) purchased the instant corporeal movables from a faculex, the owner of the instant corporeal movables; and (b) received them by means of an occupancy revision; and (c) thus, at the said time, the Plaintiff was the owner of the instant corporeal movables
C. On September 18, 2017, the Defendant asserted that the instant corporeal movables were acquired in good faith, on the grounds that: (a) concluded a security agreement on the instant corporeal movables with the business owner, who was the possessor of the instant corporeal movables; and (b) received the instant corporeal movables by means of an alteration of possession.
The acquisition of possession necessary for the bona fide acquisition of movable property requires a realistic delivery, and the possession acquisition by the alteration of possession alone cannot be satisfied. Thus, Supreme Court Decision 2003Da30463 Decided October 27, 2004.