beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. As to the vessels listed in the separate sheet, DefendantNN Investment Securities Co., Ltd.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is the owner who completed registration of ownership preservation on June 9, 1997 with respect to the vessel listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant vessel”).
B. On June 10, 1997, Nonparty EL branch Co., Ltd. completed the registration of creation of a collateral on the instant vessel, which was composed of 2,330,000,000 won with respect to the instant vessel, and the Plaintiff, the mortgagee, the mortgagee, and the mortgagee EL branch Co., Ltd., and subsequently, on October 26, 199, the instant vessel was merged with Defendant NAN Investment Securities Co., Ltd.
C. On August 4, 1998, the non-party Korean Corporate Lease Co., Ltd. completed the registration of creation of a collateral on the instant vessel as the maximum debt amount of KRW 1,200,000,000, the debtor, the plaintiff, and the non-party Korean Corporate Lease Co., Ltd.., and on March 31, 200, the defendant Korean Corporate Lease Co., Ltd completed the registration of establishment of a collateral security on May 22, 200 by acquiring the above collateral security claim from the Korean Corporate Lease Co., Ltd.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings
2. In light of the determination, there is no assertion or proof as to the period for repayment of the secured debt of each of the above secured claims, and it is reasonable to view that the secured debt is extinctive prescription from the time of its establishment as a non-fixed credit.
Therefore, the prescription of each secured claim of each of the above secured claims shall proceed respectively from the date of conclusion of each contract to establish each of the secured claims, and it is clear that ten years have passed since the date of conclusion of the above contract as of the date of conclusion of the argument in this case.
Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the secured claim of each of the instant mortgages expired due to the completion of extinctive prescription. Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of each of the mortgages establishment registration to the Plaintiff.
3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all.