logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.06.13 2018가합106092
유치권 부존재 확인
Text

1. Ascertainment that the defendant's lien does not exist with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list.

2...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C Co., Ltd. concluded a credit transaction agreement with D agricultural partnership and extended a loan to D agricultural partnership, and completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on May 29, 2017 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on the basis of the maximum debt amount 3,180,000,000.

B. C filed an application for voluntary auction on the instant real estate, and completed the registration of the entry on April 25, 2018 upon receipt of a decision of voluntary commencement on April 24, 2018 ( Daejeon District Court Seosan Branch E; hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).

C. The Plaintiff acquired the aforementioned right to collateral security from C to D farming association corporations.

On the other hand, on May 16, 2018, the Defendant reported the lien (hereinafter “instant lien”) to the effect that it has a claim for construction cost of KRW 800 million against D agricultural partnership at the above auction procedure.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the secured claim of the Defendant could not exist, and the Defendant did not have occupied the instant real estate prior to the registration of the decision to commence auction in the instant auction procedure.

Therefore, there is no lien of this case.

B. In a lawsuit seeking passive confirmation, if the Plaintiff asserts that the cause of the right is denied by specifying the Plaintiff’s claim first, the Defendant, the right holder, bears the burden of asserting and proving the fact of legal relationship. As such, in a lawsuit seeking confirmation of existence of a lien, the existence of the secured claim, which is the requirement for the occurrence of the lien, and the fact of possession thereof, should be asserted and proved (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da9409, Mar. 10, 2016). Meanwhile, the term “the possession of an article that serves as the requirement for the establishment of a lien,” which is a factual control by social norms.

arrow