logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.11.11 2015나33926
근저당권말소
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

If it is necessary for a creditor to preserve his/her own claim against a debtor, the creditor's subrogation right refers to the right of subrogation of the debtor to a third party. Therefore, in order for the creditor to exercise this in court, the creditor must prove the existence of the claim and the necessity of its preservation, the arrival of the time limit, etc. In such a case where it is not recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da39918, Aug. 30, 2012). In cases where the creditor's subrogation of the debtor is a monetary claim against the debtor, the creditor may exercise the creditor's right on behalf of the debtor against the third party only when the debtor is insolvent.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da76556, Feb. 26, 2009). The Plaintiff, as a creditor of C, sought implementation of the procedure for the registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage of this case by subrogation of C as a creditor of C. According to the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff’s right to C, which is to be preserved by the Plaintiff’s exercise of the obligee’s subrogation right, is recognized as pecuniary claim. Since there is no evidence to recognize C as insolvent at the time of the date of closing argument in

Even if there is a need for family preservation, it is recognized that C prepared a written confirmation to the Defendant on April 8, 2007, stating that “A borrowed KRW 7 million on or around February 1998, and failed to repay the principal up to now, and the interest was promised to be paid at an average interest rate of commercial banks on the basis of the time when the principal was repaid in full amount,” according to the purport of the written evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings, and it is recognized that C promised to pay the principal at an equal interest rate of commercial banks on the basis of the time when the principal was repaid in full amount.

arrow