beta
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 for this part of the judgment of the court is the same as that of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act
2. The reasoning for this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that of the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
3. Determination
A. The Defendants asserted as follows regarding the secured claim of the instant right to collateral security.
In other words, the deceased, who was aware of his knowledge, paid out the amount of the N Co., Ltd., on behalf of the customer, or lent the amount to I directly, but I recognized that the sum of the above amount on December 27, 2006 was KRW 60,000,000,000 to the deceased and set up a loan certificate, which was set up on December 30, 2010 and on December 30, 2010 and on December 2, 2010, as the above loan certificate (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”). Thus, the claim on the loan certificate of this case is the secured claim on the mortgage of this case.
According to the statement No. 1, the fact that the loan certificate was prepared as alleged by the Defendants is recognized.
However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by considering Eul evidence Nos. 2, 4, 5, and 6 as well as the witness I's testimony, i.e., to the effect that "I borrowed money within the limit of KRW 30 million from the deceased before the creation of the instant collateral security before the creation of the instant collateral security, and I borrowed money within the limit of KRW 60 million after the establishment of the instant collateral security." This is inconsistent with the grounds behind the Defendants' assertion, and ② during the examination process in which the Defendants' legal representative presented a copy of the passbook (No. 2) of the deceased, he paid 14 million won to P corporation on April 21, 2004 on behalf of the deceased, and paid 14 million won to Q on behalf of the deceased.