배당이의
1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) shall dismiss the counterclaim;
2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s claim on the principal lawsuit is dismissed.
3. The costs of the lawsuit;
1. Judgment on the counterclaim
A. On June 28, 2012, the Defendant asserted that, on March 20, 2013, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement on the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Plaintiff, which is the only property of C (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Plaintiff, as C borrowed KRW 212 million from the Defendant and failed to repay the loan amounting to KRW 200 million, and that this constitutes a fraudulent act, which constitutes a contract causing a decrease in property of C, and thus ought to be revoked.
B. We examine the judgment, the obligee's right of revocation is a system to preserve the obligor's responsible property, and it should be premised that the obligor can exercise the obligee's right of revocation against the obligor. When the obligor is granted a decision of immunity in the bankruptcy procedure, the obligee's right of revocation is not allowed unless the obligee's right of revocation is a ground for exception under the proviso of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da25978, Jun. 26, 2008). In full view of each of the statements in the evidence Nos. 21 and 22, C's application for bankruptcy and exemption including the obligor's obligation against the Defendant, and the obligor's claim of fraudulent act is unlawful and does not require further review.
2. Judgment on the principal lawsuit
A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is a legitimate tenant who entered into the instant lease agreement with C, and thus, the plaintiff is entitled to preferential payment in the instant auction procedure. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff is the most lessee or at least the small amount lessee who is protected by the Housing Lease Protection Act.
B. The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the purport of the whole pleadings in each of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 1, and 5 as evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, and 5.
1...