beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff alleged that the registration of establishment of a mortgage of each of the instant case, the debtor and the defendant as the right to collateral security, was completed even though the plaintiff did not bear a direct obligation against the defendant. The registration of establishment of a mortgage of each of the instant cases, where the secured obligation differs, should be revoked on the ground that it constitutes a registration of invalidation without cause.
2. Determination
A. The facts of recognition 1) On June 20, 2005, the defendant lent to Nonparty C, who is the husband of the plaintiff, KRW 500,000,000 on June 20, 200, KRW 500,000 on July 19, 2005, KRW 19,000 on October 19, 2005, KRW 50,000 on October 25, 2005, and KRW 50,000 on December 20, 205, the defendant and C agreed on December 20, 200 on November 21, 2006, including interest, KRW 20,000,000 on the principal of the loan, and KRW 1,350,000,000 on July 19, 200, the remainder was paid in cash, and KRW 3005,000 on December 20, 200.
3) After the above agreement between the defendant and C, on November 22, 2006, the defendant and the plaintiff concluded a mortgage agreement with the plaintiff, the mortgagee, the defendant, the maximum debt amount of 1,200,000,000 won to establish each real estate indicated in the separate list, and accordingly, the registration of establishment of each of the instant mortgages was completed (the plaintiff, although the defendant agreed to set up a mortgage with C as the debtor, he did not have any authority to do so). However, as long as the registration of establishment of each of the instant neighboring mortgages was completed, the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to set up a mortgage agreement with the above contents as a legitimate ground for registration, namely, it is presumed that the defendant acquired each of the instant collateral mortgages, and there is no evidence supporting the above presumption, so the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.
4) The Defendant filed a claim against the Plaintiff with the Dong Branch of Busan District Court on January 1, 201 against the Defendant who is the husband of the Plaintiff.