beta
Text
The Plaintiff
A. Defendant B shall have jurisdiction over the 19,900 square meters of C forest land in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do. The Cheongju District Court Musan registry office shall be the Cheongju District Court on May 195.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On May 24, 1995, the Plaintiff entered into a mortgage agreement with Defendant B as the Plaintiff, the maximum claim amount of KRW 25 million, and the debtor. On May 26, 1995, Cheongju District Court 12713 received on May 26, 1995, the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “registration of the right to collateral security”) was completed.
B. On September 7, 2015, Defendant Republic of Korea completed the registration of seizure on the above collateral.
[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. Where a claim with the right to collateral security is seized, the purpose of registering the seizure of the right to collateral security by means of additional registration for the registration of the establishment of collateral security is to publicly announce the seizure of the right to collateral security because the seizure of the right to collateral security becomes effective even if the right to collateral security is attached. If there is no right to collateral security, the seizure order shall be null and void. If the right to collateral security is cancelled, the third party with the interest in the registration of the right to collateral security has a duty to express his/her consent to the cancellation of the right to collateral security (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Da7041, May 28, 2004, etc.). (b) The fact that the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security in this case was completed on May 26, 1995, and there is no evidence to know the contents and maturity of the claim against the plaintiff of the defendant B, who is the secured right, and it is reasonable to deem that the right to collateral security has expired from the time of its establishment.
Therefore, Defendant B was able to exercise the secured claim from May 26, 1995 when the registration of the establishment of the instant right to collateral security was completed at the latest.
As such, the above claim is about May 26, 2005 when 10 years have elapsed since that time.