beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim that the court changed in exchange is dismissed.
2. The Plaintiff’s total costs of litigation.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 30, 2016, the Plaintiff acquired the transfer of movable property on each of the items listed in the separate sheet in C in the Plaintiff Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”)
B) As regards the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff lent KRW 10,00,000 to May 30, 2017 by setting the due date and interest rate of KRW 25% per annum, and C is an object listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant machines”) for the purpose of securing the performance of the above loan obligations, and “the machinery listed in No. 1 of the separate sheet in the separate sheet” is called the instant compactsaw, and the other machines listed in the separate sheet are specified in the same manner.
(2) The Plaintiff transferred the instant machines to the Plaintiff by way of the occupancy and alteration of ownership, and entered into a loan agreement for consumption of money with the content of providing the so-called “property transferred for security,” and received a notarial deed, No. 506, a notary public of the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office, which belongs to the said day (see Evidence A 1). 2) around that time, the Plaintiff transferred each of the instant machines to the Plaintiff by means of occupancy and alteration, and C continued to use each of the instant machines.
B. As to each of the instant machines, the Plaintiff’s provisional disposition prohibiting the transfer of possession by the Defendant was executed 1) The Plaintiff is also the Defendant Company (hereinafter “Defendant Company”).
(1) On October 18, 2016, the provisional disposition order against B, stating that “the right to request delivery of corporeal movables based on ownership of each of the instant machinery,” as the preserved right, shall be filed against B, and that “the Defendant Company shall not transfer possession of each of the instant machinery to another person or change the name of possession” (hereinafter “the provisional disposition order of this case”).
(2) On October 25, 2016, the execution officer H delegated by the Plaintiff, a creditor, was issued a provisional disposition order of this case (see, e.g., Daejeon District Court Decision 2016Kadan1793, and No. 4).