logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.12.24 2014가합15380
근저당권설정등기말소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The status of the parties 1) Plaintiff A is the Diplomatic Association Diplomatic Association D (hereinafter “Diplomatic Association”).

(2) The defendant is a corporation divided on March 2, 2012 in order to conduct banking business, etc. from the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation on March 2, 2012.

(hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant” in total before and after the division).

D church, etc. 1), D church, F which is the member of the D church, and E which is the representative of D church (hereinafter referred to as "D church, etc."), including the conclusion of the lease contract and the increase of the security deposit, etc. between the D church, etc.

B) On July 2, 2008, between the Defendant on July 2, 2008 and the building that was reconstructed on the G ground of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (total 5 floors; hereinafter “instant commercial building”).

A) The lease agreement providing for the lease of the second floor to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”)

(2) The instant lease contract set the lease deposit amount of KRW 5 billion and monthly rent of KRW 30 million, respectively (Article 2). Meanwhile, in order to secure the Defendant’s right to refund the lease deposit, the Diplomatic Association, etc. set the right to collateral security, at the same time, setting the amount equivalent to 120% of the total amount of the lease deposit in the future against the Defendant’s share, at the same time setting the right to collateral security, with the maximum debt amount equivalent to 120% of the total amount of the lease deposit in the future.

(4) Article 4. 3) However, since Diplomatic Association et al. failed to secure the ownership of the commercial building of this case, it would not be sufficient to secure the ownership of the commercial building of this case. Accordingly, around November 2008, NH Capital Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “NH Capital”)

On November 4, 2008, the Defendant agreed to obtain a loan of KRW 2.8 billion, and on November 4, 2008, the Defendant and the Defendant did not receive monthly rent, but agreed to increase the lease deposit from the existing KRW 5 billion to KRW 8 billion.

C. The defendant's claim for the refund of the lease deposit is secured.

arrow