logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원공주지원 2016.04.07 2015가단1955
근저당권말소
Text

1. The defendant on December 31, 1991, as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. (i) As to the non-existence of secured claim, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) issued to the Defendant the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “instant secured mortgage”) completed by the Daejeon District Court No. 27727, Dec. 31, 1991, which was completed as of December 31, 1991.

However, the defendant did not lend money corresponding to the secured debt of the right to collateral security of this case to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the right to collateral security of this case does not exist, and thus, should be cancelled.

The written evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including the number of pages) alone is insufficient to acknowledge that there is no secured claim of the instant right to collateral security, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff asserts that the statute of limitations expired for the secured debt of this case.

According to the purport of each statement or voice, witness C, and D's testimony and arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including a Serial number), the defendant set KRW 80,00,000 to C for a period of two years around 1991, and the plaintiff set up a collateral security right on the real estate of this case as the debtor around December 31, 1991 in order to provide the defendant with a security for the above loan debt of this case, the plaintiff as the debtor around December 31, 1991, and it can be recognized that the collateral security right of this case has been completed. The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case was filed on July 6, 2015, and it is clear that ten years have elapsed since the due date of the defendant's credit of the loan to Eul for the defendant's credit of this case.

Therefore, the defendant C, which is the secured debt of the mortgage of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

arrow