(영문) 청주지방법원충주지원 2015.12.17 2015가단6237

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 청주지방법원충주지원 2015.12.17 2015가단6237

근저당권말소등기

Text

1. Of the real estate listed in the separate sheet among the instant lawsuit, Plaintiff A’s share 4048/58632, and Plaintiff B’s share 331/58632.

Reasons

1. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant entered into an agreement between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant that “When the Plaintiff acquired part of the pertinent real estate from D, a co-owner of the instant real estate, and directly pays the price to the Defendant, the Defendant will cancel the registration of the establishment of the instant real estate and withdraw the auction procedure” following the registration of the establishment of the mortgage near the claim stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the registration of the establishment of the instant real estate”).

Accordingly, the Plaintiffs acquired part of the shares of the instant real estate and paid the price directly to the Defendant. As such, the Defendant is obligated to cancel the entire establishment registration of the instant real estate.

2. We examine the legitimacy of the part of the plaintiffs' share in the lawsuit of this case, ex officio, and whether the part concerning the plaintiffs' share in the lawsuit of this case is legitimate.

According to the statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1, real estate listed in the separate sheet was owned by E, F, D, and G. However, on December 4, 2014, the share of 694/58632 out of the shares of the above D was transferred to the plaintiff, and the share of 331/58632 was transferred to the plaintiff Eul. The defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on March 4, 2009 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet, the registration of the establishment of a mortgage was completed on the ground that the debtor H, maximum debt amount of 468,00,000 won was renounced, and on October 16, 2015, the registration of the establishment of a mortgage was completed on the ground that the part of the plaintiffs' share was renounced.

According to the above facts, the plaintiffs are deemed to have no legal interest in seeking cancellation again by the lawsuit of this case as to the part of the plaintiffs' shares already cancelled among the registration of creation of the neighboring mortgage of this case. Thus, this part of the lawsuit is unlawful.

3. Of the instant real estate, the Plaintiffs’ claim on the part other than the Plaintiffs’ equity interest is determined.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원천안지원 2016.09.29 2015가단10161

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.01.25 2017나51121

-대구지방법원 2017.02.03 2016가단105685

-서울동부지방법원 2016.12.22 2014가합13325

-서울고등법원 2015.07.02 2014나2033541