1. Conditional judgment not requested explicitly by the parties; and

2. Where an order is issued to cancel the registration of transfer of ownership for security on condition that the balance of secured liabilities is repaid.

The plaintiff's claim seeking the cancellation of the registration concerning the mortgaged real estate on the ground that the secured debt has been fully repaid and extinguished is recognized to have remaining, the purport of seeking the cancellation of the above registration is also included under the condition that the remaining debt will be repaid. This is, by nature, in a lawsuit for future performance, in the case where the defendant is disputing the plaintiff's principal's transfer of security itself as in this case, it is recognized that there is a benefit of recourse as a judgment in advance, and even if it is recognized that there is no concern about the difficulty of defense or the disadvantage of the defendant due to its execution. Thus, the defendant is obliged to perform the procedure for cancellation of the above registration on the condition that he is reimbursed the remaining debt from the plaintiff.

Article 229 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 480 of the Civil Procedure Act

May 12, 1970, 70Da344 delivered on May 12, 1970 (Supreme Court Decision 8954 delivered on May 12, 197, Supreme Court Decision 18 ②B citizen2 delivered on the Supreme Court Decision, and Article 229(5)929 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff

Defendant

Daegu District Court (78Gahap245)

(1) Revocation of the original judgment shall be revoked.

(2) Under the condition that the Defendant shall receive money from the Plaintiff at the rate of twenty-five percent per annum from September 27, 1979 to the full payment date, with respect to the real estate stated in the attached Table 1 attached hereto, Daegu District Court Gyeongsan District Court 21394 received on October 15, 197, and with respect to the real estate stated in the attached Table 2 attached hereto, the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration made on June 2, 197, and the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration made on June 15, 197, No. 21395 received on October 15, 1977, and the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration made on June 22, 1975 on June 18, 1976, and the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration made on June 3, 1976 on the real estate recorded in the attached Table 2 list to preserve the claim for cancellation of ownership transfer registration made on June 15, 1976.

(3) The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

(4) All the costs of lawsuit are divided into two parts of the first and second trials, and one of them is the plaintiff's and the other is the defendant's own burden.

The original judgment is revoked and the execution of the procedure for registration cancellation of each registration without the same conditions as the entries in the Disposition 2 is sought (the claim is expanded in the trial).

주문기재의 이사건 부동산중 별지 제1, 2 목록 부동산에 관하여는 1977. 10. 15.자로 피고명의의 소유권이전등기가, 같은 제3목록 부동산에 관하여는 1976. 3. 18.자로 피고 명의의 소유권이전청구권보전을 위한 가등기가 각 그 기재와 같이 경료되어 있는 사실 및 원고가 1974. 6. 18.부터 1975. 11. 14.까지 사이에 피고로부터 별지차용금 목록기재와 같이 전후 16회에 걸쳐 도합 돈 27,235,000원을, 이자는 월 4푼으로 약정하여 차용한 사실은 당사자 사이에 다툼이 없고 성립에 다툼이 없는 갑 제1호증의 1 내지 14, 갑 제7호증의 1, 2, 갑 제11호증의 1 내지 7, 갑 제12호증의 1 내지 6, 갑 제15호증의 2, 3 및 을 제5호증의 1, 2, 을 제7호증의 1 내지 10(이상 각 등기부등본), 갑 제2호증의 1,2(각 영수증)의 각 기재에 원심증인 소외 1, 당심증인 소외 2, 3, 4의 각 증언, 당심의 현장검증결과와 감정인 소외 5의 측량감정결과 및 변론의 전취지를 모아보면, 이사건 부동산중 별지 제1, 2목록 부동산은 원래 원고소유로서 원고가 경영하는 같은곳 소재 연와조공장 대지 10,876평 및 그 지상공장건물 연건평 676평 2홉중의 일부이고 특히 위 제1목록 ①내지 ⑪ 대지는 위 연와조공장의 핵심부분인 공장건물, 기름탱크, 굴뚝, 물탱크의 부지이거나 위 공장제품으로 만들 벽돌건조장, 사무실등의 부지의 일부를 이루고 있어 위 공장의 존립에 필요불가결한 대지인 사실, 원고는 피고와의 계속적인 어음대부계약에 의한 위 차용금 채무의 담보로서, (1) 1974. 6. 20.에 별지 제3목록 부동산에 그외 (ㄱ) 대구시 만촌동 (지번 1 생략) 답 118평외 5필지의 토지 및 그 지상건물 6동, (ㄴ) 같은동 (지번 2 생략) 대 66평 4홉과 그 지상건물 1동에 관하여 (2) 1975. 7. 3.에 별지 제1, 2목록 부동산에 관하여 순차 피고명의로 소유권이전청구권보전을 위한 가등기를 경료하고, 위 (1)항 각 부동산에 대하여는 원·피고간의 합의에 의하여 수차 위 가등기를 말소하였다가 설정하는등 하다가 1976. 3. 18.자로 다시 피고명의로 가등기한 사실, 원고는 1976. 4.경 약 3억원 상당의 수표부도를 내어 이의 변제가 어렵게 되자 그해 6. 경 위 연와조공장 운영권을 피고를 제외한 채권자 34명으로 구성된 채권자단에 넘기고 그해 9. 14. 위 제1,2목록 부동산을 포함한 위 공장부지 및 건물 전부를 위 채권자단 대표인 소외 3 외 7명으로 소유권이전등기를 거친 다음, 위 채권자단의 협조로 위 차용금채무의 변제로서 피고에게 1976. 11. 17. 돈 2,450,000원을 지급하고 그 다음날 위 가등기 담보된 (ㄱ) 부동산에 관한 가등기를 말소받고, 그해 11. 27. 피고에게 대한 위 채무 원금중 돈 1,550,000원을 변제함과 아울러 그해 11. 30.자로 위 (ㄴ) 부동산에 관한 가등기를 말소받았으나, 원고에 있어 그 나머지 채무원리금을 변제하지 못하자, 피고는 그 담보권 실행을 위하여 1977. 10. 15. 위 공장의 주요부분을 이루는 별지 제1, 2목록 대지 및 건물에 관하여 위 가등기에 기한 본등기절차를 이행함으로써 그 부분에 관한 위 채권자단 대표명의의 소유권이전등기가 직권 말소된 사실 및 그런 후에도 위 채권자단에서 위 공장을 계속 운영하다가 1977. 12. 경 원고측이 이를 인도받아 현재까지 운영하고 있는 사실을 인정할 수 있고, 이에 반하여 피고가 1977. 9. 경 별지 제1, 2목록 부동산을 위 채무의 대물변제로서 양도받았다는 피고의 주장에 부합되는 당심증인 소외 6, 7의 각 증언부분은, 위 인정사실 특히 위 부동산(대지)의 대부분이 원고경영의 위 연와조공장에 필요 불가결한 시설물의 부지를 이루고 있어 그것만을 그 지상공장 건물과 분리하여 양도의 목적으로 한다는 것은 통상있을 수 없다고 생각되는 점에 비추어 믿지 아니하고 당심감정인 소외 8의 싯가감정결과는 위 인정에 방해되지 아니하며 달리 위 인정을 움직일 증거없다.

If so, the attached list 1 and 2 real estate shall be deemed as a transfer of ownership as before the defendant for the purpose of securing the principal and interest of the above loan obligation against the defendant, and further, it shall be examined as to the scope of the secured debt and its repayment.

1. Principal and interest of a loan;

The plaintiff paid 2,450,00 won to the defendant on November 17, 197 as the repayment of this case, and 1,50,000 won to the above principal on November 27, 1977 as well as 1,50,000 won on the above principal amount on November 27, 197. According to each of the certificates (each deposit) Nos. 5,6,9 (each of the above principal amount) without dispute over establishment, the plaintiff's statement on November 8, 1978 as 23,235,00 won on the above principal amount as 25,465 won on the repayment of principal amount, 26,303,465 won on the above principal amount as 25,000 won on the repayment of interest, 3,873,000 won on the remainder of interest deposit or 105,000 won on the repayment of interest at the rate of 05,000 won on the above principal amount.

Therefore, when calculating the total amount and interest of the above borrowed principal and interest of the Defendant, and the remaining principal and interest of the Defendant upon satisfaction of performance according to the above order of satisfaction of performance, it is as stated in the calculation table of principal and interest. Accordingly, as of September 27, 1979, the last deposit date for repayment was KRW 17,302,067, the balance of the borrowed principal and interest as of September 27, 1979, the Plaintiff still bears the obligation to pay to the Defendant the balance of the above borrowed principal and interest at the rate of 25 percent per annum from September 27, 1979 to the full payment date.

2. Expenses for creation of security rights.

As to the Defendant’s payment of KRW 1,146,40, and acquisition tax amount of KRW 222,510,00 in the cost of registration of transfer of ownership of real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2, it shall be deemed that the Plaintiff was led to confession because the Plaintiff did not clearly dispute this, and this shall be borne by the Plaintiff, who is the debtor, as the cost of creation of a security interest. According to the statement in the evidence No. 6 (Deposit) without dispute over the establishment, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff paid the full amount of the money on February

Although the defendant asserts that 350,000 won has been disbursed more at other cost of creating a security right, there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

Ultimately, the plaintiff is obligated to pay to the defendant the balance of the above loan principal amount of KRW 17,302,067 and damages for delay at the rate of KRW 25 percent per annum from September 27, 1979 to the date of full payment. This is a security right obligation by this case's real estate. Since the plaintiff is obligated to perform the above obligation in advance due to the nature of the security right, it is not possible to seek cancellation of the above transfer of ownership registration against the defendant unless the plaintiff fully pays the above obligation. Meanwhile, if the plaintiff's claim for cancellation of the above registration concerning the real estate is deemed to remain in the remaining obligation on the ground that the above registration is extinguished by full repayment of the secured obligation, the purport of seeking cancellation of the above registration is also included in the purport of seeking cancellation of the above registration on the condition that the remaining obligation remains. This is, as in this case as in a lawsuit for performance in the future, recognized that there is a benefit to file a lawsuit in advance and recognized it as it is difficult for the defendant to do so, and therefore, the defendant is not likely to suffer any disadvantage the plaintiff 17297.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable within the scope of the above recognition, and the remainder is without merit. Since the original judgment is deemed to be unfair with different conclusions, it is so revoked and it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Articles 96, 89, and 92 of the Civil Procedure Act to the burden of litigation costs.

【Attachment List omitted】

Judges fixed ticket (Presiding Judge) Mobile Engines