logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원(창원) 2019.06.20 2018나13588
유치권 부존재 확인
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From August 23, 2016, the Defendant was awarded a contract with D (hereinafter “D”) for civil engineering works on eight parcels, including Kimhae-si, Kimhae-si, for the construction cost of KRW 549 million (Additional dues) (hereinafter “instant civil engineering works”), 50,000,000 (hereinafter “the construction cost”). From September 20, 2016 to February 20, 2017, the construction period was from September 20, 2016 to February 20, 2017.

B. C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) filed an application for voluntary auction with the Changwon District Court E regarding the instant real estate owned by D, and received a voluntary decision to commence auction from the same court on September 1, 2017, and completed the registration of the entry of the decision to commence voluntary auction on the same day.

(C) The real estate auction procedure of this case according to the above decision is referred to as “the instant voluntary auction procedure.”

On December 1, 2017, the Plaintiff was transferred by C with all of the collateral security claims that form the basis of the instant voluntary auction procedure.

On December 11, 2017, the Defendant reported a lien of KRW 500 million of the unpaid construction cost of the instant civil construction work as a secured claim in the instant voluntary auction procedure.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1 through 6, Eul's evidence 1 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleading

2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant did not complete the civil engineering work of this case by September 1, 2017, which was the date on which the decision to commence the voluntary auction of this case was entered, and did not possess the secured debt of this case, and therefore, the defendant's right of retention as to the real estate of this case does not exist.

In regard to this, the Defendant holds a claim for the construction cost of KRW 500 million upon completion of the instant civil works. Since all materials are kept in the instant real estate and currently occupies them, the Defendant asserts that there exists a lien.

arrow