logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원김천지원 2014.07.09 2014가단389
소유물반환
Text

1. The defendants and the defendant takeover intervenor No. 47 among the corporeal movables listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is a person engaged in the mar acid manufacture and sale business with the trade name “E”, and Defendant C is a child of Defendant B.

B. As of January 10, 2013, the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 100 million to Defendant B.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). C.

On July 26, 2013, Defendant C, as a debtor, was the joint and several surety of the debtor. On December 30, 2013, Defendant C drafted a notarial deed of a contract for debt repayment with collateral security (No. 776, 2013, hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) stating that the instant loan will be paid in lump sum by December 30, 2013, and that in order to secure this, Kimcheon-siF, the Defendants in the E company, and three foundations will be transferred by means of possession revision.

On November 15, 2013, and January 6, 2014, the Plaintiff requested Defendant B to return corporeal movables as stated in the instant notarial deed on the ground that Defendant B received a provisional seizure several times from a third party and lost the benefit of time, and that the repayment of the instant loan was not made by the due date.

E. On January 10, 2014, the Plaintiff received a provisional disposition order against the Defendants under the Daegu District Court Kimcheon Branch Decision 2014Kadan7, and intended to execute corporeal movables transfer by the F and E companies on January 17, 2014, but failed to implement the provisional disposition at the place of execution due to the lack of the object of provisional disposition.

F. On February 6, 2014, the Plaintiff was issued a provisional disposition against the Defendants under the Daegu District Court Kimcheon Branch Decision 2014Kadan68, and intended to execute it in Kimcheon-si G on February 6, 2014. However, the said place was not carried out on the ground that the Defendant’s acquisition intervenor’s business place is not the Defendants’ business place.

G. On March 4, 2014, the Plaintiff received a provisional disposition prohibiting the transfer of possession of corporeal movables from the Defendant Intervenor as the Daegu District Court Kimcheon-si Branch 2014Kadan199, and executed the execution in Kimcheon-si G on March 18, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition]

arrow