배당이의
1. A distribution schedule prepared on February 4, 2016 by the said court with respect to the auction case of F Real Estate in the Suwon District Court of Suwon District.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Defendant is the transferee of the right to collateral security and the right to collateral security (right to collateral security) with respect to 4.17,56 million square meters and the building on the land of Pyeongtaek-si, Chungcheongnam-do, Cheongju-do, Cheongnam-do, which was owned by EFE Ethte Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”). The Plaintiff paid substitute payment to the employees of the instant company, and the Plaintiff A, B, C, D, and E (hereinafter “Plaintiff workers”) are all workers of the instant company, who were employed by the instant company and were re-employed from the instant company and retired again.
B. As of February 4, 2016, the date of distribution of the instant voluntary auction case with respect to each of the instant real property, the Defendant owned monetary claims of KRW 2,071,732,739 in total, which is the sum of KRW 1,956,227,959 in principal and interest 115,504,780 in the instant company.
C. On November 1, 2014, the Plaintiff Workers’ Compensation and Welfare Service paid KRW 190,696,840, the aggregate of the wages for the last three months and the retirement allowances for the last three years, including the Plaintiff Workers, to the employees of the instant company, who retired from office until November 1, 2014, as a substitute payment (hereinafter “previous substitute payment”), as indicated in the attached table of the details of the payment of substitute payment, and made a report on rights and a demand for distribution.
Plaintiff
On June 3, 2015, the Korea Workers' Compensation and Welfare Service additionally paid to Plaintiffs A and B a total of KRW 168 million (7.8 million out of KRW 9,966,680, and KRW 11,750,020 among KRW 11,750,020 in the case of Plaintiff A, and KRW 9 million in the case of Plaintiff B) as substitute payment (hereinafter “instant substitute payment”).
E. The wages, retirement allowances, etc. for the remaining three-years of the final three-year period during which the Plaintiff workers worked in the instant company, after deducting each of the above substitute payments, and the final three-year retirement allowances, etc. are as specified in the table below (hereinafter “instant table”). The Plaintiff A and B included the amount equivalent to the substitute payment in this case within the completion period for demand for distribution.