The case holding that although the scope of the secured obligation in the form of a document attached to the mortgage agreement includes all existing or future obligations in addition to the relevant loan obligations that have been extended by the establishment of the mortgage, the mortgage agreement was concluded with only the relevant loan obligations as a secured obligation in light of the circumstance of the establishment of the relevant loan obligations and existing obligations, etc.

Articles 360 and 105 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1684 (Gong1990, 1684)

The last studio

National Agricultural Cooperative Federation

1. The defendant shall execute the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of each establishment of a mortgage completed on May 10, 1990 with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list to the plaintiff by the Gwangju District Court Seo-ju Registry of the Gwangju District Court.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. On May 10, 1990, 110,000 won, the maximum debt amount of 10,00,000 won, the debtor Kim Sung-ju, the defendant's branch of defendant Hasan-gun was registered as the defendant on each of the above facts as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet owned by the plaintiff, and on December 26, 1989, the amount of 498,00,000 won for other fiscal facilities allocated to Kim Sung-gun, which was operated by the above Kim Sung-gun, and the amount of 00,000 won was deposited as the loan management fund for the above 400,000,000 won for the above 70,000,000 won for the above 7,000,000,000 won for the above 90,000,000 won for the above 9,000,000 won for the above 9,000,000 won for the above loan construction contract.

2. At the time of the above contract to establish a collateral security, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to secure only the principal and interest of the loan amounting to KRW 78,00,00,000, which is borne by the non-party Kim Sung-hwan to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff deposited the above principal and interest with the Defendant, and thus, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to perform the registration procedure for cancellation of the above establishment of a collateral security right. Accordingly, at the time of the above contract to establish a collateral security right, the Defendant entered into the so-called comprehensive collateral security contract that guarantees the current or future obligation owed by the above Kim Sung-sung to the Defendant. Since the above loan claims are not fully repaid, the amount deposited by the Plaintiff does not exceed KRW 10,00,000 on the basis of the maximum debt amount of the above contract to establish a collateral security right.

Therefore, according to the evidence No. 2 (No. 2) and No. 3, the plaintiff entered into a mortgage contract with the defendant on May 8, 1990. The agreement to establish a mortgage and the agreement to provide a security can be acknowledged that the plaintiff entered into a comprehensive collateral security contract with the defendant on May 8, 1990. However, in full view of the statement No. 4 and the witness Park Jae-ok's part of the witness Park Jae-ok's testimony (excluding the part which is not trusted by the following) as the director in charge of the loan of the defendant's Y-gun branch at the time, who was in charge of the above contract to establish a collateral security contract with the plaintiff, and the above Y-ok's part of the above 498,000,000 won loaned to the above Kim Sung-ju as above and the above 78,000,000 won was insufficient to secure the defendant, and thus, it cannot be acknowledged that the plaintiff's above part of the above Y-ok's debt cannot be paid to the above 70008 billion won.

According to the above facts, even though the contract was uniformly printed and used by the defendant in the form of a general transaction agreement, and the scope of the secured obligation under the contract provision includes all the obligations existing or other causes that may be incurred in the future, in addition to the relevant loan and the relevant existing obligation, as seen above, in light of the loan and the circumstances leading up to the establishment of the existing obligation, and the explanation of the above stuff, it cannot be deemed that the contract was concluded as mentioned above, and in accordance with the explanation of the above stuff, the pertinent loan and the relevant loan, namely, the loan and the amount of 78,00,000 won loan and the amount of 78,000,000 won loan and the secured obligation, which are only the secured obligation (see Supreme Court Decisions 10, Jul. 10, 1990; 89Meu12152, Jul. 10, 199).

3. Therefore, in full view of the following facts: (a) the agreement rate from January 1, 1990 to the above 78,00,00 won was 19% per annum, and the overdue interest rate was 19% per annum; (b) the plaintiff lost its interest on December 13, 1991 and paid its overdue interest rate was 78,00,000 won from the same day; (c) Gap evidence Nos. 3, Gap evidence Nos. 4 (No. 1; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (d) Gap evidence Nos. 8 to 10; and (d) part of the testimony of the above witness Park Jae-ok, which was secured by the above right to collateral security, was 7.5% per annum; and (d) the plaintiff did not have any dispute over the principal and interest on the above borrowed interest and delayed interest on February 27, 1992; and (d) the defendant did not have to pay its overdue interest rate of 839,2994.2.25

Therefore, the debts secured by the above right to collateral security shall be KRW 78,00,000 for the above loan principal, KRW 1,266,164 for interest from September 25, 1991 to December 12, 1991 (gold KRW 78,00,000 x 7.5/100 x 7.5/100 x 79/365), and damages for delay from December 13, 191 to February 27, 1992, total amount of KRW 82,392,57/365 for the above loan principal, and the claims secured by the right to collateral security shall be extinguished due to the extinguishment of the claims secured by the right to collateral security.

4. Therefore, the defendant is liable to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the above neighboring mortgage to the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking the performance of his/her obligation is accepted on the ground of the reasons, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant who has lost

Judges Goh-hee (Presiding Judge)