beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The assertion and the key issue issue are as to the real estate C of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government No. 301 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”), and the Defendant, on September 20, 2005, drafted a performance agreement with the Plaintiff on the setting-up of the maximum debt amount of KRW 15.3 million in the event that the Plaintiff and the Defendant make a registration of preservation of ownership under the name of the Defendant on September 20, 2005, but, on December 29, 2005, filed a claim with the Plaintiff for payment of KRW 15.3 million in the performance agreement by filing a registration of ownership transfer with D at will.
In regard to this, the defendant demanded that the plaintiff set up a right to collateral on his/her behalf, set up the right to collateral and complete the registration of transfer of ownership. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is groundless.
Therefore, the issue of this case is whether the defendant violated the obligation under the implementation agreement, that is, whether the defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage and the registration of the transfer of ownership to D, according to the plaintiff's request.
2. On September 20, 2005, when the Defendant acquired the ownership of the instant real estate between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on September 20, 2005, a performance agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant setting up the right to collateral security of KRW 153 million with the maximum debt amount, or, if the ownership is transferred to the person designated by the Plaintiff, setting up the right to collateral security of KRW 100 million with the maximum debt amount (hereinafter “performance agreement of this case”). As to the instant real estate, the registration of preservation of ownership under the name of the Defendant on November 4, 2005 and the registration of creation of collateral security of KRW 11 million with the maximum debt amount under D on November 14, 2005, respectively, may be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole.
However, the entry of Eul 1-1 to 6, 15-1, 15-2, 16, 18 and E.