beta
Text
1. The Defendants, on September 5, 2005, shall be against the Plaintiff on each real estate listed in the separate sheet.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 5, 2005, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) with Defendant B on the ground of Defendant B and Network D (Death on December 1, 2019)’s agreement on the establishment of a mortgage on August 16, 2005, the maximum amount of KRW 140,000,000, and the debtor, Defendant B, and Defendant B, and network D (hereinafter “the instant collateral security”) with the maximum amount of KRW 11358 on the ground of the receipt of the registration office of Suwon District on August 16, 2005 (the death of December 1, 2019) (hereinafter “the instant collateral security”). On December 24, 201, the Plaintiff was declared to have died on December 1, 2019, and the Defendant C and Nonparty, his spouse, who was the heir, and was adjudicated on March 20, 2002.
【Unfounded Grounds for Recognition”; Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 7; Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers, if any) and the court's factual inquiry into the head of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. Since the Plaintiff indicated the claim fully repaid to Defendant B the obligation to return the investment amount, which is the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security, Defendant B is obligated to perform the registration procedure for cancellation of the instant right to collateral security registration, which was completed on each of the instant real estate.
(b) Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable law (a judgment by service of public notice)
3. We examine the judgment as to the claim against Defendant C, and the Plaintiff paid to the network D the full amount of the obligation to return the investment amount, which is the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security.
As Defendant C does not clearly dispute this, Defendant C extinguished the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security by repayment.
It is reasonable to view it.
Therefore, Defendant C, the heir of the network D, is the real estate of this case.