logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.07 2016가단5273959
채무부존재확인
Text

1. As to each real estate listed in the attached list to the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall have the Suwon District Court's Sung-nam Branch Office.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant house”) and is working as a nurse at a hospital located in the U.S. Emirate from June 18, 2010 to the date of the U.S. Emirate.

B. On July 29, 2015, when the Plaintiff was staying in two (2) B, the Plaintiff entered into a loan transaction agreement with the Defendant to obtain a loan of KRW 210 million from the Defendant on the condition that the Plaintiff provided the instant housing as security without authority, by designating 4.5% per interest month, on the condition that the Plaintiff provided the instant housing as security, and the Plaintiff’s driver’s license kept in the instant housing was arbitrarily presented to the Defendant and affixed the Plaintiff’s seal imprint.

(hereinafter “instant loan transaction agreement”). C.

In addition, D, without authority, concluded, on August 19, 2015, a mortgage agreement with the Defendant regarding the instant housing in the name of the Plaintiff with the maximum debt amount of KRW 252 million, the debtor, the debtor, and the mortgagee as the defendant. Based on this, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage registration (No. 68498) with respect to the instant housing on August 19, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as “the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage of this case”) D.

In around 2016, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Sung-nam Branch of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office for the crime of forging private documents, etc., and on April 11, 2017, the Sung-Nam Branch issued a disposition suspending prosecution on the grounds that D's whereabouts are unknown.

[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 6, Gap evidence 7-1, 2, Gap evidence 9-1, 2-2, and this court's inquiry reply to the Seoul Immigration Office and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the registration of the establishment of the creation of the instant neighboring facilities by using the Plaintiff’s driver’s license and seal imprint which D, who was not authorized by the Plaintiff, had been arbitrarily possessed.

arrow