logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.10.15 2013가단214679
근저당권말소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 27, 2006 with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”).

B. On October 5, 2007, on the apartment of this case owned by the Plaintiff, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of the neighboring apartment (Uwon District Court Receipt No. 21608) with the obligor and the person establishing the right to collateral security as the Plaintiff and the maximum debt amount of KRW 70 million.

C. The Defendant filed an application for voluntary auction with this court on May 27, 2013, and received a decision to commence voluntary auction on the 28th of the same month.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff or the plaintiff's mother did not borrow money from the defendant, and that the plaintiff does not agree to the defendant to make a joint and several surety or a real guarantee for the defendant, so the registration of the establishment of a mortgage of this case should be cancelled because the registration of the establishment of a mortgage of this case is null and void.

On September 1, 2007, the defendant, around October 2007, lent KRW 50 million to the plaintiff's mother C, and in the meaning of joint and several guarantee for the above loan obligation, C, on behalf of the plaintiff, made a registration of establishment of a mortgage over the apartment of this case lawfully and effectively.

B. In a case where a third party is involved in a disposal act, not by a direct disposal act of the former registered titleholder, but by a third party, the current registered titleholder’s assertion that the third party is the agent of the former registered titleholder. In a case where the third party is the agent of the former registered titleholder, the former registered titleholder’s claim that the third party is the agent of the former registered titleholder.

arrow