logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원경주지원 2020.08.26 2019가단3106
근저당권말소등
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On September 24, 1997, the Plaintiff’s assertion D had registered the establishment of a new mortgage on each part of 1/2 shares in the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by himself to E Association. However, since the extinctive prescription of the secured claim was completed on September 22, 2002 with commercial bonds, each of the above registered mortgages should be cancelled.

However, since the plaintiff has a judgment claim against the non-party D, the defendant who acquired the above collateral security interest claim from the E Union by transfer of the above collateral security interest claim from the E Union is obligated to perform the procedure of confirming the non-existence of the above collateral security interest claim and the procedure of cancelling the registration of cancellation

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. A. A lawsuit seeking confirmation of the establishment of a mortgage is permissible when the Plaintiff’s right or legal status is infeasible danger and obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to fundamentally resolve the dispute. On the grounds that the extinctive prescription of the secured claim of each of the claims stated in the purport of the claim has expired, it is apparent in the record that the Plaintiff seeking cancellation of the establishment of a mortgage mortgage and seeking confirmation of non-existence of the secured claim at the same time. In the absence of the secured obligation, seeking cancellation of the establishment of a mortgage on the ground that the absence of the secured obligation is a direct means to effectively resolve the dispute, and thus, there is no benefit to seek confirmation of non-existence of the secured obligation separately.

Therefore, the part concerning the claim for confirmation of existence of debt among the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

B. When there is a need to preserve the claims where the creditor's right to the obligor to be preserved by subrogation is a monetary claim, in determining the claim seeking the cancellation of the registration of creation of each collateral stated in the purport of the claim, in the subrogation of the debtor.

arrow