beta
Text
1. The defendant, on May 17, 2005, shall provide resident support for the Daegu District Court with respect to the area of 1,041 square meters prior to C before residing in the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. 1) The Plaintiff is 1,041 square meters prior to C at the time of residence (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
(2) On May 17, 2005, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the part of the obligor (hereinafter “mortgage”) under Article 9740 of the Daegu District Court’s receipt of machinery such as resident settlement support, etc. with respect to the instant real estate.
B. From December 19, 2009 to July 22, 2014, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 50,000 (two times), KRW 100,00 (three times), KRW 270,000 (two times), KRW 270,000 (one time), KRW 320,000 ( four times), KRW 40,000 (one time), KRW 400,00 (one time), and KRW 50,000 (one time), and KRW 4,90,00 (one time) to the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, 11, 12, 16, Eul evidence No. 2, witness D's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. We examine the part of the claim for registration of cancellation of the right to collateral security in this case: (a) the following circumstances, which can be seen by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement in Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 7, Gap evidence No. 10 through 12, and Gap evidence No. 15, are as follows: (i) the defendant is the mortgagee of the right to collateral security in this case; (b) the plaintiff has a certificate of personal seal impression issued directly by the defendant on February 5, 2015; and (c) the defendant alleged that the plaintiff stolen the above registration certificate and the certificate of personal seal impression; (iv) the plaintiff requested the defendant to continuously contact the defendant from around that time to April 2015 to cooperate with the cancellation of the right to collateral security in this case, but the defendant did not respond to it; (iv) the defendant requested the plaintiff to pay more than 10 years after the establishment of the right to collateral security in this case; and (v) the defendant did not receive the certificate from a certified judicial scrivener office.