beta
Text
1. As to the real estate stated in the attached list to the Plaintiff, the Defendant received on September 26, 1991 from the Cheongju District Court No. 74662.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the ground of the Plaintiff’s claim
A. The facts of recognition were established on May 11, 1976 for the purpose of the credit loan business, etc. by means of mutual credit fraternity business, installment repayment, etc. The defendant was dissolved with the approval of the Minister of Finance and Economy on December 27, 1996, and the defendant, on September 26, 191, for the purpose of securing loan claims against B (hereinafter “the instant claim”), on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) as of September 26, 1991, the Cheongju District Court received 74662 as of September 25, 191, 191, and completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the instant real estate (hereinafter “the instant real estate”), the debtor, B, and the mortgagee as the defendant, on July 10, 1996, the plaintiff did not have any dispute between the parties concerned or completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the instant real estate on each of the following grounds:
B. According to the above facts, the statute of limitations for the instant claim is five years as commercial bonds. Thus, unless there is any evidence to prove that the due date for the instant claim has been fixed, it shall be deemed a bond with no fixed time limit, and since a claim without fixed time limit may be exercised from the time of its establishment, the statute of limitations shall run from that time.
Therefore, since the claim of this case could have been exercised from September 26, 1991, which was the date of the registration of the establishment of the mortgage of this case, at the latest, the mortgage of this case was extinguished upon the expiration of the extinctive prescription on September 26, 1996, and the mortgage of this case also extinguished according to the nature of the collateral security right.
I would like to say.
Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is limited to the Plaintiff on the ground of the extinction of the prescription period of the secured claim regarding the registration of the establishment of the instant neighboring mortgage.