A. Interpretation of Article 357 of the Civil Code, which provides for the scope of the amount of the claim secured by the collateral security and the amount of the debt secured by the collateral security, "the maximum amount of the debt secured by the collateral"

B. The nature of the right of claim for the extinction of the mortgage held by the third party purchaser of the mortgaged real estate due to repayment of the secured debt.

A. An interpretation of Article 357 of the Civil Code, which provides for the scope of the amount of the claim secured by the collateral security, and the maximum amount of the debt to be secured by the collateral security, shall be interpreted.

B. The nature of the right of claim for extinguishment of mortgage which the third party purchaser of the mortgaged real estate has due to performance of the obligation on the mortgage.

Article 357 of the Civil Act, Article 364 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

The Bank of Korea, Inc.

Seoul High Court Decision 70Na478 delivered on December 3, 1970, Seoul High Court Decision 70Na478 delivered on December 3, 1970

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal No. 1 by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below held that the non-party, as the owner of the real estate in question, was the non-party Hanyang Industrial Co., Ltd., the debtor against the defendant, and the non-party company had pledged his property to secure another's property to secure another's property within the limit of KRW 1,350,000 among the debts which the non-party company had already borne or will have already been borne by the defendant, and that there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the registration was completed. Based on evidence, the defendant purchased the real estate in question from the above non-party on May 7, 1969 and completed the registration of transfer of ownership on May 8 of the same year, 1969, after the decision of commencement of auction was made. The plaintiff, as the third acquisitor of the real estate for auction purpose, had no special claim for the remaining amount of the secured property within the maximum amount of KRW 1,350,000 and KRW 22,000,00,00 for the remaining amount of the secured property.

However, the scope of the claim secured by the collateral security shall be limited to the maximum debt amount set in the collateral security contract during the period for the settlement of accounts, and it shall not be secured by the debt amount exceeding the maximum debt amount set in the collateral security contract, and the purport of the maximum debt amount to be secured shall also be interpreted as above. As to this case, it shall be interpreted as follows: if the plaintiff purchased the real estate for the auction purpose, as the third acquisitor who purchased the real estate for the above auction purpose, on behalf of the above non-party company, on behalf of the debtor, for the above non-party company, as the court below acknowledged the original judgment, deposits the total amount of 1,350,00 won and the auction cost secured by the real estate for the defendant, the plaintiff may file a claim for the extinction of the collateral security right under Article 364 of the Civil Act, and this is an inherent right, so long as this exceeds the maximum debt amount of the defendant's collateral security against the non-party company, it shall be viewed as a bond secured by the original judgment, and as long as this is remaining, it shall not be justified.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the original judgment is reversed and remanded. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Kim Young-chul Kim Young-ho (Presiding Judge)