logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.08.22 2017가단6289
배당이의
Text

1. The Suwon District Court prepared on February 21, 2017 with respect to the compulsory auction (E.F.) of D real estate (E.F.) by the same court.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 8, 2015, the Plaintiff borrowed 40 million won from J, and completed the registration of creation of a mortgage (the debtor, the plaintiff, the maximum debt amount of 60 million won) on the same day on September 8, 2015, with respect to the housing of 590m2 and its ground (the second floor of 148.42590m2, 80.73590m2; hereinafter the above land and buildings together with the above land and buildings) owned by the Plaintiff as security.

B. Around January 26, 2016, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 60 million from L (M) who is a credit service provider, and agreed to pay KRW 40 million directly to J and pay KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff as collateral, and agreed to set up a collateral security amount of KRW 90 million to the Plaintiff.

In addition, the repayment period was agreed on January 26, 2017, 2.5% of interest per month (30%) and 2.9% per month (34.9% per year).

C. However, following the lack of loan funds, the above L has the Defendant lent 60 million won to the Plaintiff and arranged to set up a collateral on the said condition, and the Defendant accepted this and became the lessee of the Plaintiff instead of L.

(3) On January 26, 2016, the Plaintiff recognized the Defendant as the lessee, thereby consenting to the change of the lessee. Accordingly, on January 27, 2016, the Defendant completed the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage (the Plaintiff and the maximum debt amount KRW 90 million) on the instant real estate.

However, unlike the agreement with the plaintiff, the defendant did not pay 40 million won to the J directly. Accordingly, the registration of the establishment of a neighboring establishment of the J still remains without cancelling the registration.

E. In addition, on January 26, 2016, the Defendant remitted KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff as a loan account transfer, but immediately received 6 million as a fee by account transfer and paid only KRW 14 million.

F. The instant case.

arrow