logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.07.15 2014가단52877
근저당권말소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C around July 26, 2001, issued a credit guarantee agreement with the Plaintiff under the credit guarantee agreement with the Plaintiff and obtained a loan from the bank as a security, and B had C’s spouse as joint and several liability for indemnity against the Plaintiff.

B. On September 7, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) paid the loan on behalf of C; (b) applied for payment order against B with the Gwangju District Court 2012 tea8357; and (c) on September 7, 2012, the Plaintiff issued a payment order to B, “B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 312,578,749 and KRW 180,519,689 each year from August 29, 2012 to the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order; and (d) the payment order became final and conclusive at that time.

C. On the other hand, on July 27, 2004, B completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage on the real estate stated in the attached list B (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Defendant, who is the husband of a female student, based on the same date-based mortgage contract (hereinafter “instant mortgage contract”) as to the real estate indicated in the attached list B (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1 to 6, Eul evidence 1 and 2

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment thereon

A. As seen above, it cannot be concluded that the mortgage contract of this case was concluded between the defendant and his wife B with the judgment as to the assertion that the mortgage contract of this case was null and void as a false conspiracy. However, it cannot be concluded that the mortgage contract of this case was concluded with a false conspiracy without any monetary transaction.

Rather, according to the statements in Gap 3 through 6, Eul 9-1, Eul 10-1, and Eul 10-1, and Eul's testimony, Eul and Eul 3 million won from the defendant around April 2003, 4 million won around September 2003, 60 million won around November 11, 2003, and 60 million won around December 2003.

arrow