logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2015.10.07 2015가단105034
제3자이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the purport of the entire pleadings in each statement of evidence Nos. 1 to 6 of the basic facts.

On April 10, 2012, the Han Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “I Bank”) established a registration of the establishment of a mortgage with a share of 143.4/4/1720 as joint collateral among the share of 1550-3 m2, 720.4 m2, 150-4 m2, 1550-5 m2, 1,485 m2 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant factory site”) in Yangpo-si, Kimpo-si, Yangpo-si, Yangpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter referred to as “the instant factory site”), the second floor of the ground steel frame, 491.25 m25 m2, 480 m2, and Kimpo-si, Yangpo-si, Yangpo-si, Yangpo-si, Yangpo-si.

B. On December 11, 2012, at the request of one bank, the Busan District Court rendered a voluntary decision to commence the auction of the instant factory site, etc. to the above court A on December 11, 2012, and the Defendant acquired the secured debt of the right to collateral security from one bank during the process of the said voluntary auction procedure, and submitted a report to change the creditor to the executing court on April 17, 2013

다. 한편 이 사건 공장 1층에는 별지 도면 표시 ㉣부분과 같은 형태의 별지 부동산 목록 기재 구조물(이하 ‘이 사건 구조물’이라 한다)이 설치되어 있는데, 이 사건 구조물은 등기부등본 또는 건축물대장에 등재되어 있지 않다. 라.

On June 20, 2013, the execution court decided to collectively sell the instant structure, including the object of auction, as a building other than the presentation of the structure.

2. The plaintiff asserts to the effect that the judgment on the cause of the claim is the owner of the structure of this case, and the compulsory execution by the voluntary decision on the commencement of auction on the structure of this case should be dismissed as unlawful.

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit, since it is difficult for the plaintiff to recognize that the plaintiff is the owner of the structure of this case only with the descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 through 6.

3. As such, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed on the ground that it is reasonable.

arrow