beta
Text
1. The defendant shall receive on August 12, 2002 from B the Chuncheon District Court, the East Sea Registry of the Republic of Korea with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff was finally transferred on September 7, 2012 the credit card price, etc. (principal amounting to KRW 16,467,60) to Samsung Credit Card Company B via the order of a limited-liability company, promotion mutual savings bank, stock company, and Koro New Credit Loans.
B. On the other hand, on August 12, 2002, B completed on August 12, 2002, the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the real estate stated in the attached list in the Defendant as “the maximum amount of claims KRW 15,000,000, B, and the Defendant of the debtor and the mortgagee” (hereinafter “the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the root of this case”), and is currently insolvent.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3-6 evidence (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Both claims and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserts to the effect that the establishment registration of the mortgage of this case is null and void as the secured debt of this case was nonexistent or extinguished by prescription.
In this regard, the defendant is arguing to the effect that the registration of the establishment of the mortgage of this case was completed in order to secure the loan claims against B, and the extinctive prescription of the secured debt has not yet been completed.
B. (1) The judgment of the court below is a mortgage created 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). Since multiple unspecified claims arising from a continuous transaction are established for the purpose of securing a certain limit in the future settlement period, there must be a legal act establishing a secured claim of the right to collateral separate from the act of establishing the right to collateral. The burden of proving whether there was a legal act establishing the secured claim of the right to collateral at the time of the establishment of the right to collateral, is the part of the assertion of existence.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da107408 Decided April 28, 201, etc.).