logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.12.06 2018나3404
제3자이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 10, 2017, the Defendant issued a favorable judgment to the Defendant for the payment of KRW 250,000,000, and damages for delay thereof (hereinafter “instant favorable judgment”) by filing a lawsuit against the Defendant, etc. for the return of the investment deposit, etc. with the Goyang-gu District Court 2016Gahap75480, the Defendant was sentenced to a favorable judgment (hereinafter “instant favorable judgment”).

B. C appealed on the above judgment as Seoul High Court No. 2017Na2027318, but the judgment became final and conclusive on January 10, 2018, upon having been sentenced to dismissal of an appeal on December 21, 2017.

C. On February 28, 2018, the Defendant delegated the execution of the instant winning judgment to this Court No. 2018No. 529, and the execution of the seizure of corporeal movables (hereinafter “instant execution”) with respect to the objects listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant movables”) at the domicile of C (hereinafter “instant movables”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence 3-1 and 2- Each entry, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) on August 1, 2016, when lending KRW 4 million to C’s husband D, the Plaintiff concluded a transfer security agreement with D and part of the instant movable property (other than No. 11 or No. 14 of the instant movable property) and prepared a notarial deed. As such, the instant execution is unlawful since the remainder of the instant movable property, other than No. 11 or No. 14, is owned by the Plaintiff. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that the instant transfer security agreement constitutes a false conspiracy and thus null and void.

B. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6 and all pleadings, the plaintiff was provided as security for transfer (hereinafter "the instant security transfer contract") with television, air conditioners, air conditioners, etc., located in Da and Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, 218 and 1403 for the purpose of lending the repayment period to D on July 31, 2018 and securing its performance to D, who is the husband of C on August 1, 2016. D and notary public receive corporeal movable property transfer security (hereinafter "the instant security transfer contract").

arrow