beta
Text
1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is on the notarial deed No. 412, 1990, No. 412, 199.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 30, 1990, the Plaintiff drafted a notarial deed of promissory notes stating that “if the Plaintiff fails to pay by the due date of payment of promissory notes (the due date of payment), it shall be acknowledged that there is no objection even if it is immediately enforced,” with the purport of guaranteeing the Defendant’s guarantee of KRW 30 million borrowed from the Defendant.
B. On February 1, 1990, the Defendant created a right to collateral security of the maximum debt amount of 30 million won with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff as the secured debt on a promissory note No. 1, 1990. On March 14, 1990, upon receiving a decision to commence the auction on March 14, 1990, the Seoul Northern District Court D, but on October 8, 1990, the above court decided to refuse the auction and revoke the commencement of auction on the ground that “E’s right to claim for ownership transfer registration under the name of the Defendant was registered based on the registration of the right to claim ownership transfer registration as of December 20, 1989, the right to collateral security under the name of the Defendant should be revoked ex officio.”
C. The Defendant filed an application for the specification of property on the basis of the said promissory note No. 2014Kao-10397 with the above court, and received a decision of citing it from the above court.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2 (including additional number), Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. We examine whether the claim under the Notarial Deed of Promissory Notes has expired by prescription.
A. A creditor who had been registered prior to the registration of the first decision to commence the auction and had a mortgage extinguished by the sale can file a request for auction to exercise a security right, and may participate in the distribution as a matter of course, even if he did not demand a distribution at the auction procedure commenced by another creditor upon the request of the other creditor. If such creditor exercised his right by reporting the existence of the claim, its cause and amount to the court, such report on