(영문) 전주지방법원군산지원 2016.05.24 2015가단8990

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 전주지방법원군산지원 2016.05.24 2015가단8990

제3자이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Basic Facts

On the basis of the authentic copy of No. 37 of 2014 No. 37, the Defendant filed a motion for seizure of corporeal movables held by a notary public against B in the Dosan-si and five parcels (hereinafter “the site for the two houses of this case”).

(No. 2015No. 1196). On September 8, 2015, 2015, upon the Defendant’s above application, the enforcement officer of the Jeonju District Court’s Gunsan Branch’s Military Branch’s Office attached corporeal movables listed in the attached list possessed by B at the same location.

B On August 1, 2014, the Plaintiff leased the site for the instant mooring from the Plaintiff, and was engaged in the double mooring at the same time, and the corporeal movables listed in the attached list are machinery and facilities used to run the double mooring business.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the plaintiff's assertion as to the plaintiff's claim for the purport of the whole oral argument, are leased to Eul by the plaintiff who is engaged in the balring at the site of this case. The object of lease was not only the site of this case but also the facilities and equipment installed for the balring business at the site of the balring site of this case.

As such, corporeal movables listed in the attached list are corporeal movables owned by the Plaintiff and leased to B, and the Defendant cannot seize corporeal movables listed in the attached list on the basis of a title of execution against B.

In fact, the Plaintiff, from January 7, 2005, was engaged in the mass production business in the instant mass production area, and on September 1, 2008, leased the site of the instant mass production to D, and on August 1, 2014, the lease contract with D was terminated, the site of the instant mass production was leased to B.

The lease deposit under the lease agreement between the plaintiff and D was KRW 60 million, and the rent was KRW 2.5 million per month.

The lease deposit under the lease contract between the plaintiff and B was KRW 10 million, KRW 1.6 million monthly, and the lease term was until August 1, 2021.

In the site of this case, the plaintiff is a leader.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 안동지원 2016.11.04 2016고단704

-대구지방법원 포항지원 2017.04.25 2016가단6260

-수원지방법원 2017.05.23 2016가단551300

-전주지방법원 남원지원 2013.04.16 2012고단343

-대전지방법원논산지원 2019.05.22 2018가합2882