logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.16 2017가단95113
근저당권설정등기말소 청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendant shall provide the Plaintiff with the support for the head of the Gwangju District Court on January 19, 1994 with respect to the farmland of 90,004 square meters in Jeonnam-gun, Jeonnam-gun.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of a collateral security (hereinafter “mortgage registration of this case”) with respect to the forest CY 90,004 square meters owned by the Plaintiff, the mortgagee D, and the maximum debt amount of KRW 400 million on January 19, 1994, under the title of Article 1284, which was received on January 19, 194 by the head of the Gwangju District Court, the Plaintiff registered the establishment of a collateral security (hereinafter “mortgage registration”).

B. On May 28, 2015, D, the mortgagee of the instant collective security registration, died with E, son F, G, and Defendant, a spouse, and E, G and Defendant. On August 19, 2015, EFG filed a report of renunciation of inheritance with Sungwon District Court Branch 2015Ra1187, and received the report on the renunciation of inheritance on October 2, 2015. On August 19, 2015, the Defendant filed a report on the renunciation of inheritance with Suwon District Court Branch 2015Mo1186, Suwon District Court Branch 2015, and received the report on the recognition of succession on September 21, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the registration of the right to collateral security in this case was completed on January 19, 1994, as seen earlier, and the fact that ten years have elapsed thereafter is apparent from the fact that the right to collateral security in this case was completed on January 19, 1994. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the secured claim should be deemed to have expired upon

Therefore, following the death of D, who is the mortgagee of the instant collective security registration, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation registration of the instant collective security registration to the Plaintiff.

If so, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted for the reasons and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow