beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Fact that there is no dispute over the cause of the claim, and according to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and all the pleadings, the plaintiff loaned KRW 300 million to the defendant on April 2, 2012, with the interest rate of KRW 1%, and the due date of repayment as of April 2, 2014. The defendant was unable to pay the above loan and interest by the due date. Accordingly, if the plaintiff did not repay the loan to the plaintiff as of June 2, 2014, the defendant prepared a written statement as of April 10, 2014, stating that the ownership of each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the defendant should be transferred to the plaintiff in lieu of the above fact.
According to the facts of recognition as above, if the Plaintiff and the Defendant fail to repay the principal and interest of KRW 390 million to the Plaintiff by June 2, 2014, it is reasonable to deem that they entered into an agreement for payment in kind with the content that would accord and satisfaction of ownership of each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and the Defendant did not pay the principal and interest of the loan by June 2, 2014, on the grounds that there is no dispute between the parties. Thus, the Defendant is liable to implement each procedure for the registration of ownership transfer for each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff on April 10, 2014.
[Judgment of the court below] Although it is unclear whether the above agreement is null and void because it violates Articles 607 and 608 of the Civil Act, even if the agreement is null and void against the above provisions, it is valid as an agreement to establish a weak meaning of a security for transfer. If the agreement does not complete the registration of transfer based on the agreement, the obligee is entitled to file a claim for the performance of the procedure for registration of transfer of ownership with respect to collateral on the ground of a security for transfer (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da5120, Feb. 9, 199).