beta
Text
1. The defendant on February 2009, as to each real estate listed in the attached list to the plaintiff, the Yongsan District Court of Seoul Western District.
Reasons
Basic Facts
C: (a) On February 25, 2009, the Yongsan District Court of the Seoul Western District Court: (b) established the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the right to collateral security”) with the maximum debt amount of KRW 200 million; (c) the debtor C; and (d) on March 2, 2009, borrowed KRW 100,000,000,000 from the Defendant as collateral the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the loan of this case”).
Meanwhile, for the registration of the establishment of the instant right to collateral security, Article 1 of the document establishing the right to collateral security (hereinafter “right to collateral security”) prepared on February 24, 2009 between C and the Defendant states, “The party establishing the right to collateral security shall, within the scope of the said amount, set up the right to collateral security on the real estate, which was written in the end of the secured co-owner’s name and seal as either a separate or joint obligation or a guarantor to bear or will be borne by the obligor at present against the obligee, or a joint and several obligation, such as a certificate of payment, and all obligations arising
On July 5, 2010, the defendant lent KRW 1 billion to the Crdco Co., Ltd., Ltd. and agreed to receive reimbursement of KRW 1.3 billion including interest after one month. Of the loans, KRW 100 million was borne by C.
At the time, C jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s debt of the above loan (hereinafter “instant joint and several sureties”) for the World expenses, and issued a check of 1.3 billion won per unit as security.
Meanwhile, on the other hand, the Defendant filed a claim against C for the performance of the above joint and several liability, and the Northern District Court rendered a judgment that C is liable for payment of KRW 1170 million to the Defendant under the 201Gahap2931 Decided November 18, 201, and the Defendant’s appeal was dismissed and the said judgment became final and conclusive.
On the other hand, the Plaintiff, the wife of C, caused the promise to divide the property on October 27, 2010 for each of the above real estates.