logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.10.26 2017가합23236
유치권 부존재 확인
Text

1. The Defendants’ lien on each real estate indicated in the annexed real estate does not exist.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff acquired the right to collateral security against A from the Industrial Bank of Korea, and is in the position of the applicant creditor in the voluntary auction procedure (U.S. District Court B; hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).

B. In the auction procedure of this case, the two comprehensive construction companies on the port side Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant two comprehensive construction”) is indicated in the attached real estate.

2. As to the real estate stated in (hereinafter “factory Adong”), the lien with the claim for construction cost of KRW 219,000,000 as the secured claim, and the delayed payment damages as the secured claim was also reported to the Defendant at present, Inc., Ltd., and the lien with the claim for construction cost of KRW 217,00,000 as the secured claim, and the delayed payment damages as the secured claim against the factory Adong, respectively.

C. On the other hand, indication of Adong factory and attached real estate

1. The recorded real estate (hereinafter “retail”) was a separate building at the time of its initial completion, but became a single building connected through construction thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy facts, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1 through 6, Gap evidence 3, 4, and 6-1, Eul evidence 1-3, Eul evidence 5-1 through 6, Eul evidence 6-1 through 4, Eul evidence 11, 12, 17, 19, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s claim is that the Defendants’ claim for construction cost as the secured claim of the right of retention on the Adong and retail stores was nonexistent, and the Defendants’ claim for confirmation that there was no lien on the above buildings.

3. Determination as to the existence of lien for the defendant's two comprehensive construction works

A. On April 2, 2013, Defendant Two Free Construction Claim: (a) the construction work connecting A’s operation and retail stores from A was contracted to KRW 259,000,000; (b) the construction work was paid KRW 40,000,000 as the down payment was paid; and (c) the construction work was completed on August 30, 2013, and the construction work was due and payable.

arrow