logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.09.01 2015가합61035
유치권부존재확인의 소
Text

1. It is confirmed that the defendants' lien does not exist with respect to real estate stated in the attached list.

2...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff filed an application for compulsory auction with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by Nonparty Company (hereinafter “instant real estate”) based on the original copy of the payment order in the instant case, such as amount of indemnity, etc., with the court 2009Da1067, which was filed against the third party Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “foreign Co., Ltd.”). On June 17, 2010, the decision on compulsory auction was entered in the registry of the instant real estate.

B. The Defendants reported a lien in the above auction procedure between July 29, 2010 and December 1, 2014, on the ground that they were not paid the construction price by the non-party company.

[Ground of Recognition] ① Defendant A, B, C, D, shipbuilding and Economic Research Institute for Incorporated Foundation, and Gangnam Engineering Co., Ltd.: Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, and 9, the entire purport of the pleadings, and the entire purport of the pleadings. ② As to the Defendant Pampas Co., Ltd., Ltd., the Construction of Secondirs, E, F, Alpha Construction, the Identity of the Co., Ltd., the lender comprehensive construction company, and the UN Sski

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendants did not possess the instant real estate, and there is no secured claim of the lien reported by the Defendants, and the Defendants were unable to claim the lien on the instant real estate due to the Defendants’ report of the lien, but failed to observe the auction procedure due to the Defendants’ report of the lien, and the sale price has been continuously reduced, thereby causing damage to interested parties, such as the Plaintiff, etc., and thus,

3. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The above Defendants’ assertion is deemed to have been led to the confession of all of the Plaintiff’s assertion in accordance with Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act, since the sampling Co., Ltd., Inc., 2, E, F, Alpha Construction, Co., Ltd., Ltd., alpha Co., Ltd., Ltd., alpha Construction, Ltd., alpha Construction Co., Ltd., Ltd.

(b).

arrow