logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원마산지원 2013.06.14 2012가합273
유치권부존재확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

(a) 1) Han Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “one Bank”);

(3) The Gyeongsung Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Gyeongsung Industry”)

(B) the land of each building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) for the purpose of securing loan claims against the Plaintiff.

(2) On February 31, 2010, one bank completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring building consisting of KRW 1,950,000,000 for the maximum debt amount on February 26, 2010, and completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring building consisting of KRW 1,690,000 for the maximum debt amount on June 16, 2010.

B. On October 11, 2011, one bank filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate with the Changwon District Court Msan Branch B regarding the instant land and buildings based on the right to collateral security as above, and the said court rendered a voluntary decision to commence the auction on October 12, 201.

(hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). C.

In the auction procedure of this case on November 29, 201, the Defendant alleged that the construction of the building of this case was performed by being awarded a contract for the construction of the building of this case from the Daesung industry, and did not receive the construction cost of KRW 2,520,00,000, and reported the lien of which the total amount of interest in arrears was KRW 2,87,298,630 as the secured claim.

On the other hand, on November 24, 2011, the Plaintiff acquired claims based on the above-mortgage-mortgage-backed claims against the light industry of one bank. On December 28, 2011, the Han Bank notified the light industry of the above assignment of claims.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 to 6 evidence, Eul 15 evidence (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The Defendant submitted a written contract for the change of the construction contract with the light industry, and changed the construction cost of the instant building from the original KRW 2,449,700,00 to KRW 3,850,000,000, and increased the KRW 1,400,300,000.

arrow