logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.03.27 2017가단4173
소유권이전청구권가등기말소
Text

1. The defendant on May 16, 2007, as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to C (D).

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 16, 2007, the Defendant completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) on each real estate listed in the separate sheet, which is owned C (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) on the 2th day of the same month.

B. On September 3, 2008, the Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on each of the instant real property in the amount of KRW 180 million with the maximum debt amount, and the debtor E with respect to each of the instant real property.

[Reasons for Recognition] 1-1 and 2-1 of Evidence A

2. The provisional registration of this case as to the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion was based on the pre-sale agreement on May 2, 2007, and the pre-sale agreement was invalidated due to the lapse of the exclusion period.

The plaintiff primarily focuses on the right to claim the removal of disturbance under Article 370 and Article 214 of the Civil Code, and in the preliminary case, C's right to claim the cancellation of provisional registration is subrogated as a mortgagee of the right to claim the cancellation of provisional registration.

3. The defendant asserts that, since the plaintiff did not have any claim against C with respect to the defense prior to the merits, the claim in this case is unlawful as there is no creditor subrogation's secured claim.

However, the plaintiff primarily claims the removal of disturbance under Articles 370 and 214 of the Civil Code, and can accept the primary claim as shown below. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

4. The right to make the purchase and sale effective by expressing the other party's resolution on the completion of the purchase and sale in the unilateral promise as stipulated in Article 564 of the Civil Act, as to the merits, shall be extinguished upon the lapse of the exclusion period, even if the other party has delivered the real estate which is the object of the reservation, if the exercise period has been stipulated as a sort of formation right, and if there is no such an agreement, it shall be exercised within 10 years after the establishment of the reservation, and if the above period has elapsed, it shall be extinguished upon the lapse of the exclusion period.

The right to make a reservation of the provisional registration of this case is sold.

arrow