beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay 80,000,000 won from the Plaintiff and 12% per annum from November 7, 2017 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. From December 11, 2014 to August 3, 2015, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 91,000,000 from the Defendant to August 3, 2015, and completed the registration of establishment of a right to collateral security (hereinafter “registration of creation of a right to collateral security”) to claim against the Defendant regarding the real estate stated in the separate sheet in order to secure the above loan obligation.
From June 16, 2015 to December 29, 2015, the Plaintiff paid a sum of KRW 69,950,000 to the Defendant and only KRW 21,050,000 to the Defendant remains. Since the Defendant refused to receive the changed proposal and the Plaintiff deposited the remainder of KRW 21,050,000 with gold No. 4227 in this Court, the registration of establishment of the right to collateral security stated in the purport of the Defendant’s claim should be cancelled as the extinguishment of the secured obligation.
2. Determination
A. Therefore, according to the health stand and evidence No. 3, the Plaintiff’s deposit of KRW 21,050,000 with the Defendant as a person who was the principal of the Defendant.
However, in order to be effective a deposit for payment, there must be a proposal for the full amount of the obligation and a deposit for the full amount of the obligation, and the deposit for a part other than the full amount of the obligation does not have the effect of extinguishing the obligation even with respect to the deposit portion unless the obligee accepts it (see Supreme Court Decision 98Da17046 delivered on October 13, 1998, etc.). As seen thereafter, as seen earlier, there remains a balance between the amount of the obligation guaranteed against the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security and the deposit amount exceeding the above deposit amount.
The above deposit can not be effective as repayment, and the evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is sufficient to reverse it and all of the secured obligations are extinguished by the change of the secured obligation.
It is insufficient to recognize it.
B. Determination (1) On the other hand, the Plaintiff paid the full amount of the secured debt.
(b) argument.