Attachment on the claims with the right to collateral security, claiming invalidity of cause

At the time of establishment of the right to collateral security, the burden of proving whether there was a legal act establishing the right to collateral security at the time of establishment of the right to collateral security exists. Therefore, if the defendant fails to prove it, he/she must express his/her consent to the cancellation of the right to collateral security in

Article 24 [Attachment] of the National Tax Collection Act

Daegu District Court's Sung Branch 2017Gadan201 (No. 12, 2017)

AA

1. BB 2. Korea

2017.05.31

2017.12

1. Defendant BB shall implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage completed by the Daegu District Court No. 12293, Sept. 23, 2000, with respect to the Plaintiff’s ○○○○○○○○○, ○○○○, ○○○○○, 471, a 4,304 square meters, including gender support, etc., of the Daegu District Court.

2. Defendant Republic of Korea expressed its intent to accept the registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a new mortgage as stated in the above 1.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants.

The same shall apply to the order of the Gu office.

1. As to the claim against Defendant BB

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act;

2. As to the claim against the defendant in Korea

A. 1) The registration of creation of mortgage in the BB name as shown in the Disposition No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) owned by CCC was completed on September 23, 200, and the registration of creation of mortgage in the BB name as stated in Disposition No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as “instant collateral security”).

2) On August 24, 2016, the Defendant seized the instant collateral security claims against BB with respect to CCC, and completed the registration of seizure of collateral security claims with respect to the registration of the establishment of the said collateral security claims as the receipt of No. 14430 on August 30, 2016 by the same registry office.

3) On December 21, 2016, DD completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant land. The Plaintiff purchased the said land from DD on February 13, 2017, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on February 22, 2017.

B. Determination

1) The right to collateral security is a mortgage established by setting only the maximum amount of the debt to be secured and reserving the determination of the debt in the future (Article 357(1) of the Civil Act), and is established with the aim of securing a certain limit at a settlement period in the future. Thus, separate from the act of establishing the right to collateral security, there is a legal act establishing the right to collateral security separately from the act of establishing the right to collateral security. The burden of proof as to whether there was a legal act establishing the right to collateral security at the time of establishing the right to collateral security exists.

Meanwhile, in the event that a claim with a right to collateral security is seized, the purpose of registering the seizure of the right to collateral security by means of additional registration in the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security is to publicly announce the seizure of the right to collateral security because the seizure of the right to collateral security is not effective when the right to collateral security is seized. If there is no right to collateral security, the seizure order shall be null and void. In the event of cancellation of the right to collateral security, the seizure right holder has a duty to express his/her consent to the cancellation of the right to collateral security as a third party with a interest in the registration (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Da7041, May 28, 2004; 2009Da72070, Dec. 24, 2009). However, although the defendant asserted the existence of the right to collateral security of this case, the defendant has no obligation to present his/her consent to the establishment of the right to collateral security in this case as a third party with the above certificate of collateral security.

3. Conclusion

If so, all of the plaintiff's claims are reasonable, it is decided as per Disposition by admitting them.