logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2014.01.23 2011나8073
유치권부존재확인
Text

1. The decision of the court of first instance against the defendant that falls under any of the following subparagraphs shall be revoked, and above.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 1, 2009, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 3 billion to B on December 1, 2009 (hereinafter “the instant loan”), and concluded a mortgage contract with respect to each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet owned by B for securing the principal and interest of loan (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”) with a maximum debt amount of KRW 3.9 billion, and completed the establishment of a mortgage.

B. On September 15, 2010, the Defendant entered into a construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with respect to the construction work and the interior work for bath use of real estate No. 9 listed in B and the separate sheet No. 3,417,309,80 won (hereinafter “instant construction work”) (i.e., the construction cost of KRW 1,467,309,800 (i.e., the installation cost of KRW 1,950,000) (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) (i.e., the said construction contract was notarized on December 13, 2010), and (ii) the construction work was performed between September 20, 2010 and December 12, 2010.

C. B, as the interest payment on the instant loan obligation was in arrears, thereby losing the benefit of the time limit, the Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction on December 8, 2010 with the Daegu District Court Kimcheon Branch C for the instant real estate, and obtained a decision to commence the voluntary auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) from the above court on December 10, 201, and the registration of the decision to commence the auction was completed on December 14, 201.

As to the instant construction work, the Defendant filed a lien report with B on February 1, 201, asserting that the instant construction work had a claim of KRW 3,417,309,80 for the said construction cost, and that each of the instant real estate was possessed.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 5 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul's 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The summary of the plaintiff's assertion 1) B is the defendant's.

arrow