quasi-loan contract for consumption, the return of the borrower's borrowed goods, and Article 607 of the Civil Act

Article 607 of the Civil Code also applies to the borrowed object to be returned by the borrower according to the quasi-loan contract for consumption.

Article 607 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and two others

Daegu District Court Decision 66Na383 delivered on July 13, 1967

The original judgment shall be reversed, and

The case shall be remanded to the Daegu District Court Panel Division.

The defendants' agent's ground of appeal No. 3 is examined.

According to the judgment of the court below, if the non-party 1, who is the wife of the plaintiff, lent 30,00 won to the non-party 2 on November 18, 1965, and completed the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security with the maximum amount of 30,000 won on the land of the defendants' assertion for the security of 30,00 won on the right to collateral, and the number of days under the jurisdiction of the above non-party 1 was set on January 18, 1966, and the above non-party 2, who was a member of several districts of the above fraternity at the time when the total amount was settled, determined as 140,00 won, and in order to secure the performance of the obligation, the court below rejected the registration of establishment of the right to collateral security at the same time as the defendant et al. al.'s agent's claim that the above non-party 1 was not subject to the above contract's ownership transfer under the name of the plaintiff 16.

However, the court below recognized the above 30,00 won and 140,000 won as above and promised to transfer the ownership of the building and site. Among them, 30,000 won are recognized by the court below, and it is based on Gap evidence 6 cited by the court below in finding the above facts. On November 18, 1965, the right to collateral security registered as of November 18, 1966 and the right to collateral security established as of January 18, 196, stated that the amount indicated in the separate promissorysory note as of January 18, 196 shall be 0,00 won, and it shall be 0,000 won, and it shall be 0,000 won, and it shall be 0,000 won, and it shall be 0,000 won, and it shall be 0,000 won, and it shall be 0,000 won, 100,000 won, which shall be paid for the above loan for consumption.

Therefore, without any further proceeding to decide on the other grounds of appeal, the final appeal is justifiable. Therefore, Article 406(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that the judgment is delivered with the assent of all participating judges.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Mag-Jak Park Mag-gu