logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.01.09 2017가단4939
저당권말소등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by B (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the registration of creation of a mortgage (hereinafter “registration of creation of a mortgage”) was completed on May 20, 1998 with respect to the respective real estate as indicated in the separate sheet owned by Gwangju District Court Decision No. 16032, May 20, 1998.

B. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B for the claim for acquisition amount of KRW 40,415,240 and the judgment ordering B to pay damages for delay in the amount of KRW 9,670,535 among them, which became final and conclusive on November 27, 2015.

C. B is the defendant's head (the third father of B's third father D), and B is the insolvent at the time of the conclusion of the argument in this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the registration of the establishment of a mortgage of this case by the defendant was invalid by false conspiracy, or that the prescription period of the secured claim of this case should be terminated by the lapse of 10 years after the expiration of the prescription period, at the time of the filing of the lawsuit of this case.

B. Determination 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion on the assertion of false conspiracy is insufficient to recognize the same, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently. Rather, according to each of the above facts and evidence Nos. 3 and 6, the Plaintiff’s assertion in this part is without merit. The Defendant prepared and received from B a certificate of loan of KRW 250,000,000 from B at the time of the creation of the instant collective security right, and the fact that B prepared and delivered a letter of payment for KRW 130,000,000 to the Defendant on December 10, 2014. 2) The facts acknowledged prior to the determination of the claim on the extinction of prescription, and the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 580, May 20, 1998; Defendant and Nonparty B as well as Nonparty B on May 20, 1998.

arrow