logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.11.23 2018가단63930
손해배상(기)
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 13, 2012, Plaintiff A and B, the owner of the Dong-gu E and seven parcels (hereinafter “instant plot of land”), signed a construction contract with G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) that had been actually operated by F, and a multi-household housing (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of the instant land, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant plot of land while performing the construction work.

B. On January 23, 2014, H and Mapo Development completed the registration of preservation of ownership on each of the instant partitioned buildings, and on the same day, the Plaintiff C, the model of Plaintiff B, among the 37 households of the instant partitioned building, created a right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) with respect to the 24 households among the 37 households of the instant divided building, totaling KRW 120,000,000 per each household’s maximum debt amount.

C. On November 10, 2014, the Defendant filed an application with the Ulsan District Court 2014Kahap830 regarding the instant right to collateral security with respect to the right to claim for cancellation of the right to claim for registration of collateral security against G as the preserved claim, and the provisional injunction was completed on November 26, 2014 in accordance with the foregoing court’s provisional injunction approval order.

Plaintiff

C filed an objection against the instant provisional disposition order with the Ulsan District Court 2015Kahap32 on January 14, 2015, and the said court revoked the instant provisional disposition order and rendered a decision to dismiss the Defendant’s application for provisional disposition on May 19, 2015.

In addition, as of May 26, 2015, the execution according to the instant provisional disposition order was rescinded.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff A, A.

arrow