logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017. 02. 09. 선고 2016가단124465 판결
근저당권부채권에 대해 압류등기를 하였으나 그 피담보채권이 존재하지 않는 것으로 입증된 경우 압류등기자는 이에 승낙하여야 함.[국패]
Title

If it is proved that the secured debt does not exist even though the seizure of the secured debt is registered, the seizure registrant must accept it.

Summary

If it is proved that the secured debt does not exist even though the seizure of the secured debt was registered, the Republic of Korea should accept the registration of cancellation of the secured debt.

Related statutes

Article 24 of the National Tax Collection Act

Cases

2016da124465 Registration of cancellation of the right to collateral security, etc.

Plaintiff

1. RedA;

Defendant

1. BB;

2. Korea;

Conclusion of Pleadings

on 19, 2010

Imposition of Judgment

on October 017, 2010

Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant BB performed the procedure for the cancellation of registration of the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage completed under No. 20256 of the receipt on June 25, 2003 with respect to the area of 238-1, 331 square meters in Eup/Myeon-dong, Si, Seojin-si, Daejeon District Court.

B. Defendant Republic of Korea expressed its intention of acceptance on the registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage as stated in the above A.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

Cheong-gu Office

Text

Paragraph (1) shall apply.

Reasons

1. Claim against Defendant BB

(a) Description of the claim;

The reasons for the attached Form shall be as shown in the attached Form.

(b) Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Act);

2. Claim against Defendant Republic of Korea

There is no dispute between the parties as to the facts of the argument in the attached form of the claim, and the defendant

The State shall have an interest in the registration of the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a mortgage near the place mentioned in paragraph (1) of this Article.

The third party has a duty to express his/her consent.

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and it is decided to accept it.

shall be determined as above.

arrow