logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.10.02 2017가단8705
채무부존재확인 및 부당이득반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 17, 2008, the Plaintiff’s wife completed on September 17, 2008 the registration of the establishment of a neighboring apartment E (hereinafter “the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage”) that consists of the Plaintiff, the mortgagee, the Defendant, the maximum debt amount of KRW 70,000,000, which is owned by the Defendant.

B. On October 17, 2008, the Plaintiff and C drafted a certificate of borrowing KRW 60,000,000 from the Defendant on March 31, 2009, interest rate of KRW 2%, and interest payment date of KRW 15,00 (hereinafter “the first certificate of borrowing”).

C. The registration of the establishment of the first place neighboring to the instant case was cancelled on July 21, 2010 on the ground of termination.

C On August 28, 2010, 40,000 won from the Defendant had been due on August 30, 201, and on August 30, 2011, the loan certificate stating that the loan will be borrowed by setting the interest payment period as the 30th day of each month (hereinafter “the second loan certificate of this case”). The Plaintiff signed on the joint and several guarantee column of the loan certificate. On August 30, 2010, C completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage (hereinafter “registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case’s second loan”) consisting of the debtor, the mortgagee, the defendant, the maximum debt amount of 50,000,000 won.

E. From October 25, 2008 to March 14, 2016, the Plaintiff and C remitted each amount indicated in the “date of satisfaction of obligation” as “the date of satisfaction of obligation” in the attached Table of appropriation to the Defendant to the account under the name of the Defendant, and also paid KRW 2,00,000 to the Defendant in cash.

F. As to the instant real estate, the procedure for compulsory auction was initiated with F of this Court. On December 21, 2016, 50,000 won was distributed to the Defendant, who is a mortgagee, in the order of 3rd priority on the date of distribution of the said auction case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, Gap evidence 6-2, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 2 through 4, 13, and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

arrow