Case of Dispute of Loan Contract and Mortgage Contract: Urban Credit Cooperative of Jingzhou Autonomous County Inhabited by Miao and Dong Ethnic Groups in Hunan Province V. Yang Longzhang@#
PROCEDURAL POSTURE@#
On March 18,1997, the Urban Credit Cooperative of Jingzhou Autonomous County Inhabited by Miao and Dong Ethnic Groups, in Hunan Province (hereinafter refereed to as "UCC"), and Yang Longzhang entered into a loan contract and a mortgage contract which provided that: UCC should loan to Yang a six-month RMB 2,225,000 with a 9.24% rate per month while Yang had to mortgage a six-story house, which is located at Hongxing West Road, Quyang town, Jingzhou County, for the loan. However, Yang Longzhang failed to pay the loan on Sep.17, 1997 when the loan became due, so UCC filed an action against him in Jingzhou People's Court. During the trial of the case, Zou Benjie, the legal representative of UCC, entered into a refunding agreement with Yang Longzhang on Oct. 13, 1997 which provided that: "Yang shall balance the second story of the said house against the UCC's loan at the judicial expertise price made by Intermediate People's Court of Huaihua Prefecture, any overpayment shall be refunded and any difference in price shall be demanded a supplemental payment. Yang should bear the transfer formalities and the required taxes hereof". On Nov. 10, 1997, Office of Judicial Expertise Technology under Huaihua Intermediate People's Court appraised the said house and issued (1997) Huaizhongfafangjianzi No.53 judicial expertise, which held that the said story was worth RMB398, 300(including the land price). People's Court of Jingzhou County found that: the loan contract and the mortgage contract, made between UCC and Yang Longzhang on March18, 1997, were valid because both parties' true wills were declared in them and the contracts were in line with the law; Yang Longzhang should pay off the loan for the refunding agreement's validity, it also held that Yang's claim for UCC to refund the price difference of the house based on their agreement should be supported. Therefore, the court entered (1998) Jingminchuzi No.133 civil judgment which read as follows:"1. Yang shall convert the second story of a six-story house, located at Hongxing West Road, Quyang Town, Jingzhou County, into money to pay off the principal RMB225, 000 and the interest RMB16, 600 hereon (total: RMB 241, 600) that he owned to UCC, and he shall render the transfer papers and the land use certificate to UCC within 30 days upon the judgment's coming into effect, and he shall bear the required taxes and cost thereof.2. As to the price difference of the house RMB 156, 700 that UCC owned to Yang, UCC shall pay RMB86, 700 to Yang within 15 days after the judgment comes into effect and pay the left RMB70, 000 to him within 30 days after the judgment comes into effect.3. As to the court acceptance fee RMB 14,700, UCC shall bear RMB8, 500 and Yang shall bear the left."@#
．．．．．．

湖南省靖州苗族侗族自治县城市信用社诉杨隆璋借款抵押合同纠纷案@#
@#
1997年3月18日，湖南省靖州苗族侗族自治县城市信用社（以下简称城市信用社）与杨隆璋签订了一份借款合同及抵押合同，合同约定：由城市信用社贷款22．5万元给杨隆璋，月利率为9．24‰，借款期限六个月，杨隆璋用座落于靖州县渠阳镇红星西路一栋六层楼的房屋作为抵押担保。1997年9月17日，贷款到期后，杨隆璋未偿还贷款，城市信用社诉之于靖州县人民法院。在该案审理过程中，城市信用社的法人代表邹本杰与杨隆璋于1997年10月13日达成《偿还债务协议》，协议约定：由杨隆璋用抵押房屋中的第二层全层折价抵给城市信用社，折价金额以怀化地区中级人民法院司法技术鉴定价格为准，多退少补。房屋过户手续及所需税费由杨隆璋负担。1997年11月10日由怀化地区中级人民法院司法技术鉴定室对房屋进行了鉴定，作出了（1997）怀中法房鉴字第53号司法技术鉴定。鉴定认为该层楼房价值（含地价）为39．83万元。靖州县法院审理认为：城市信用社与杨隆璋1997年3月18日所签订的借款合同及抵押合同系双方当事人的真实意思表示，且符合法律政策规定，借款合同、抵押合同合法有效。城市信用社的法定代表人邹本杰与杨隆璋所签订的《偿还债务协议》合法有效，杨隆璋欠贷未还无理，应予以偿还。双方协议将抵押物中的第二层折价抵给城市信用社，杨隆璋要求城市信用社给付房屋差价款的请求，本院予以支持。据此靖州县法院以（1998）靖民初字第133号民事判决：（一）杨隆璋所欠城市信用社贷款本金22．5万元及利息1．66万元，共计24．16万元，由杨隆璋用其座落在靖州县渠阳镇红星西路的一栋六层房屋中的第二层折价偿还，杨隆璋于本判决生效后30日内将房过户手续及土地使用权证书交给城市信用社，所需税费由杨隆璋承担。（二）城市信用社所欠杨隆璋房屋差价款15．67万元，城市信用社于判决生效后15日内付给杨隆璋8．67万元，余款7万元于本判决生效后30日内付清。（三）案件受理费1．47万元，由城市信用社负担0．85万元，杨隆璋负担0．62万元。@#
．．．．．．