배당이의
1. The distribution schedule prepared on February 12, 2015 by the said court with respect to the auction case of real estate rent D in Daegu District Court Branch D.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The building on the north-gu E, Northern-gu, 239 square meters (hereinafter “instant building site”) and the multi-family house on the fourth floor above ground (hereinafter “instant building”) are real estate registered in F’s name.
B. As to the instant building, the Plaintiff concluded a lease contract as indicated below, and completed the fixed date and move-in report, and the Defendants completed the registration of establishment of chonsegwon as indicated below.
(hereinafter referred to as the “right to lease on a deposit basis”). Plaintiff B (203, 45,000,000 on September 26, 2012, 2012, Defendant C303 and 76,000,000,000 on September 24, 2012 (No. 83599) Defendant C on September 24, 2012 (No. 836,00,000)
C. On March 31, 2014, with respect to the instant building and the instant site (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the auction procedure for real estate auction was initiated as D with the Daegu District Court Port Branch Branch D on March 31, 2014. On the date of open distribution on February 12, 2015, the auction court distributed KRW 390,291,455, which deducts the costs out of the proceeds from the sale of the instant real estate, as listed below, and did not distribute the remaining amount to the Plaintiff as the remainder did not remain.
The dividends in the grounds for distribution in distribution order among creditors shall be KRW 14,00,000,000 for the small-sum lessee G1 in the amount of KRW 283,210,710, Defendant B, Defendant B, Defendant B, who is concurrently a creditor and a mortgagee, KRW 45,00,000,00 for Defendant C 48,080,745, in total, KRW 390,291,455.
D. Accordingly, the Plaintiff stated an objection to the entire amount distributed by the Defendants on the date of distribution, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution of the instant case.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendants' right to lease on a deposit basis is null and void as it is for the bond security, but the dividend court distributes it as above on the ground that it takes precedence over the plaintiff, which is the tenant with the fixed date set.
B. 1) Whether this case’s dividend is unlawful or not is determined.