공동저당 부동산이 양도되어 소유자가 다르게 된 경우 후순위저당권자의 대위와 변제자대위의 관계 -대법원 2021.12.16. 선고 2021다247258 판결-

If the jointly mortgaged real estate all owned by the debtor or a part of the jointly mortgaged real estate owned by the same real estate guarantor is transferred to a third party, thereby resulting in the change of the owner, or if a part of the jointly mortgaged real estate owned by the debtor is transferred to the real estate guarantor, or a part of the jointly mortgaged real estate owned by the same real estate guarantor is transferred to the debtor, thereby resulting in the change of the owner, problems may arise regarding the status of the mortgagee next in priority. In this regard, according to the Supreme Court Decision 2021Da247258 ruled on December 16, even if a part of the real estate owned by the same guarantor is transferred to a third party and the owner is changed, the status of the mortgagee next in priority is not affected because the owner of each real estate can subrogate as a person who has performed obligation only in proportion to the value of the real estate, pursuant to Article 482 (2) 3 and 4 of the Civil Act. However, the court decision is based on the premise that Article 368 applies only to cases in which all jointly mortgaged real estate is owned by the debtor or real estate guarantor, and does not apply to the case in which jointly mortgage real estate is owned by the debtor and real estate guarantor. Considering that Article 368 is the special provision of Articles 481 and 482, the court decision is contrary to the principle of prioritizing special provisions and constitutes a mere circular argument. In the case where a real estate guarantor or third party purchaser has taken over the debt or assumed an obligation while acquiring the ownership of the jointly mortgaged real estate, they do not have the right to indemnify even if the real estate is auctioned or allocated first, resulting in their inability to subrogate as a person who has performed obligation. This can cause a problem that the mortgagee next in priority of the real estate owned by the real estate guarantor or the third party purchaser is unable to subrogate the mortgage right of the prior mortgagee to the real estate owned by the debtor. In addition, expectations about the subrogation of the mortgagee next in priority should be protected as it can be considered common that the mortgagee next in priority, who has loaned money using the real estate owned by the debtor with a joint mortgage as collateral along with the real estate provided by the real estate guarantor, is granted subsequent mortgagee by determining the value of the collateral in consideration of the proportion of the prior mortgagee’s claims to be borne by the real estate provided by the real estate guarantor. Therefore, it can be said that the mortgagee next in priority of the real estate owned by the debtor that is auctioned and allocated first can subrogate the mortgage of the prior mortgagee on the real estate owned by the real estate guarantor or the third party purchaser, pursuant to Article 368 (2).