Text
The part against Defendant B among the judgment of the first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim expanded by this court.
Reasons
The court of this case cited in the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case has the same reasons as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for a partial modification of the conclusion after adding or adding the reasoning below. Thus, this case is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 4
(이 사건 각 근저당권설정등기의 피담보채무에 관한 피고들의 항소이유는 제1심에서의 주장과 크게 다르지 않고, 피고들이 이 법원에 추가로 제출한 사정과 증거를 보태어 보아도 제1심의 판단은 정당한 것으로 인정됩니다). 2면 18행부터 3면 2행까지 부분을 아래와 같이 고쳐 씁니다. 가.
On August 21, 2018, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Defendant B”) sent to Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) a registration of creation of collateral security (hereinafter “registration of creation of collateral security right”) of claim amounting to KRW 1 billion at the acceptance number D on August 21, 2018, with respect to each of the construction machinery listed in Schedule 1 through 6, 8 through 14 (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned construction machinery”) and construction machinery listed in Schedule 2 List 7 (hereinafter “N-owned construction machinery”), which were owned by the Plaintiff at the time.
Since July 17, 2019, the Plaintiff completed the registration of change of ownership on the “N-owned construction machinery” with respect to “N-owned construction machinery.”
3 pages 10 (based on recognition) add “A No. 10” to 3 pages 10.
7면 17행부터 8면 5행까지 부분을 아래와 같이 고쳐 씁니다.
C. On the other hand, since the registration of establishment of a mortgage of each of the instant units is null and void because there is no secured debt, the owner of each of the instant units of real estate and each of the instant construction machinery and the party to the said contract to establish a mortgage has the right to claim the cancellation of the said registration of establishment of a mortgage to the mortgagee of each
(See en banc Decision 93Da16338 delivered on January 25, 1994, see Supreme Court en banc Decision 93Da1638 delivered on January 25, 199.