logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.11.29 2017가단102867
배당이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 15, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract on May 15, 2014 with C and his/her ownership on seven square meters in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul E large 46 square meters, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E, and D [Road Name Address] 50.12 square meters in residential facilities with the first class neighborhood living facilities with the first-class 46 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and three square meters in Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and H [Road Name Address] 48.20 square meters in residential facilities with the second class neighborhood living facilities with the second class village in Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and 2nd class 35.46 square meters (retail-mortgage and paper] [the second class 46 square meters in storage, 300 square meters in Seoul, and 400 square meters in Seoul, with the maximum debt amount to be incurred in the future (the real property of this case).

B. On August 12, 2014, the Plaintiff registered the establishment of a neighboring mortgage with respect to the instant real estate at the Seoul Northern District Court (Seoul Northern District Court) under Article 57065, which was received on the same day from the same day, with the obligor C and the maximum debt amount of KRW 250,000.

C. C borrowed from the Defendant a loan of KRW 200,00,000 (the following first loan) on April 28, 2014, KRW 500,000,000 on May 15, 2014 (the next loan is the first loan), and KRW 50,000,000 on July 8, 2014 (the next loan is the third loan).

The sum of principal and interest of loans Nos. 1, 2, and 3 as of January 10, 2017 is KRW 770,57,962.

E. In the case of Seoul Northern District Court B regarding the instant real estate, the Defendant received 770,577,962 as the first secured mortgage, and the Plaintiff received 149,662,246 as the second secured mortgage, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The full credit of the Plaintiff’s 1 and 3 loans asserted by the parties;

arrow