logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.02.14 2019나57166
유치권 부존재 확인
Text

1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the respective “F” in Chapters 9 and 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance is deemed to be each “E”, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of

[The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of first instance is deemed as evidence Nos. 6 through 17, and Nos. 10 through 13, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that Defendant B occupied the land of this case prior to the commencement order of voluntary auction of this case. ② Defendant C installed a container prior to the commencement order of voluntary auction of this case, and explained that the possession of the land was verified through the site manager H, and the notice was posted at the entrance of the land of this case. However, it is difficult to recognize that Defendant B paid part of the above electrical charges at H at the entrance of the land of this case. However, it was difficult to recognize that the above container’s wall or the phrase “in the event of the exercise of the right of retention” of the above section of the wall of this case or the phrase “in the event of the exercise of the right of retention” of the above section of the court below’s decision of voluntary auction of this case and that the above land was located at the time of the commencement order of voluntary auction of this case.

In full view of the facts that there is no corrective device or facility installed to control access, and thus, it appears that the passage could be relatively free. Thus, it is recognized that Defendant C commenced possession from the point of view that prior to the decision to commence voluntary auction of this case to the point of excluding the possession of others as the elements for establishing the lien prior to the decision to commence voluntary auction of this case.

arrow