logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.09.25 2015가단20905
추가근저당권설정등기이행등
Text

1. The Defendants are with respect to the Plaintiff with respect to the size of 230 square meters in Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, E large 17 square meters in size, and F forest land 7453 square meters in size.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant C obtained a loan from the Eunpyeong Credit Union, and the Defendants completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage as of the Seoul Western District Court’s Seodaemun-gu Seoul Western District Court No. 25668, Jun. 29, 2007; and the registration office No. 45091, Sept. 9, 2008, with respect to each of the Defendants’ shares among the size of 230 square meters, E, 17 square meters, and F forest No. 7453 square meters.

B. On March 22, 2007, the Defendants entered into an agreement on the provision of collateral for the provision of collateral for the provision of collateral after providing each real estate listed in the attached list, which was newly constructed, as well as each of the above collateral in addition to the above collateral security immediately after completion of the construction.

C. On the other hand, on April 11, 2014, the Eunpyeong Credit Union transferred to the Plaintiff the loans against Defendant C, the right to collateral security and other rights attached thereto, which was established for the said security, and completed the registration of transfer of each of the above rights to collateral security.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-1 through 4, Gap 2 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Comprehensively taking account of the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are obligated to complete the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage on each real estate listed in the separate sheet pursuant to the above security agreement, and the right to claim the registration was transferred to the Plaintiff by transfer on April 11, 2014, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is with merit.

arrow