(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2016.01.07 2015가단4052

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2016.01.07 2015가단4052

근저당권설정등기말소 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. On August 16, 2012, the Plaintiff established a joint collateral security (hereinafter “instant collateral security”) on the land specified in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 owned by the Plaintiff and the buildings indicated in paragraph (2) of the attached Table No. 2 of the attached Table No. 1 owned by the Plaintiff on August 16, 2012, with a view to appropriating the new construction cost of the building under the ground No. 2 located in Ansan-gu, Ansan-si. Around that time, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 50 million from the Defendant.

B. On July 5, 2013, the Plaintiff’s mother: (a) provided the Defendant with the land in Mayang-gu, Manyang-si; and (b) borrowed KRW 120 million from the Defendant as collateral; and (c) agreed with the Defendant to repay KRW 50 million out of the above loan to the secured debt of the instant mortgage; (b) the secured debt of the said right to collateral was extinguished due to repayment on July 5, 2013.

C. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the instant neighboring mortgage and to return KRW 5,142,270, which was paid by the Plaintiff as interest from July 5, 2013 to February 16, 2015, to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

2. On July 5, 2013, the Plaintiff’s claim for cancellation of the registration of creation of a mortgage and the claim for return of unjust enrichment on the premise that the secured debt of the instant mortgage was extinguished due to repayment on July 5, 2013, on the ground that the Defendant and the Defendant agreed to repay KRW 50 million among them as a substitute loan for the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security, and there is no evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim for cancellation of the registration of creation of a mortgage and the claim for return of unjust enrichment on the premise that the secured debt of the instant mortgage was extinguished due to repayment on July 5, 2013 are without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.05.15 2013가합26390

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2019.11.27 2019가단88169

-대법원 2020.10.15.선고 2019다222041 판결

-부산지방법원 2017.08.16 2016나43091

-대전지법 2008. 9. 5. 선고 2007가단30192 판결