logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.27 2017나77444
건물명도
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The reasons for this part of this Court's reasoning are as follows: "1. Basic facts" among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the part of "1. Basic facts"; therefore, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420

2. According to the judgment on the ground of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, who is the owner of the instant building.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant's assertion that around 1999, the defendant supplied Ltimsan Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "Ltimsan Development"), as a stone supplier, with the construction material amounting to KRW 1.2 billion, but did not receive the payment. However, the defendant succeeded to the defendant's obligation to Ltimsan Development by succeeding the business right of Mtimsan Development. Since the defendant, as the owner of the site of the building of the building of this case, occupied the building of this case with D's permission, who was the husband of the plaintiff who actually performed the construction of the new building, as the owner of the building of this case, the defendant had occupied the building of this case, the defendant exercised commercial lien as the secured claim at the time of possession.

B. (1) The legal principle of (a) the commercial lien does not need to be “as to the subject matter” unlike the civil lien, but the subject matter of the lien is limited to “the debtor’s ownership” (see Article 58 of the Commercial Act and Article 320(1) of the Civil Act). The purport of limiting the subject matter of the commercial lien to “the subject matter owned by the debtor” is to limit the subject matter of the commercial lien to “the subject matter owned by the debtor.” In the case of the commercial lien, the secured claim does not have the nature of the public interest cost for the subject matter by relaxing the relationship between the subject matter and the secured claim. Therefore, the secured claim may be extended to the unlimited extent with all commercial claims arising between the lien holder and the debtor, and thereby, the third party has already secured the right to the subject matter.

arrow