배당이의
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The main grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance. As examined below, it is difficult to accept the evidence submitted in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance is added to the evidence additionally submitted in the court of first instance,
Therefore, the court's explanation on the instant case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with the main text of Article 420
2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs
A. Plaintiff B and C’s appeal asserted that Plaintiff B and C appeared on the date of distribution and raised lawful objection with power of attorney, certificate of personal seal impression, and certificate of family relationship as a person with parental authority of Plaintiff B and Plaintiff C, a minor, as the person with parental authority.
However, in light of the fact that the record on the date of distribution of the real estate auction case E by the Incheon District Court was written as an objection by only Plaintiff A, and there are no circumstances to deem that the above protocol was mistakenly recorded, it is reasonable to deem that Plaintiff B and C were not qualified as a party to a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution as a person who did not raise a legitimate objection regarding the instant distribution schedule.
Therefore, the above argument by the plaintiff B and C is without merit.
B. Determination on Plaintiff A’s appeal 1) The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the instant lease agreement was concluded with only the authority delegated by G with G, a 1/4 equity right holder; and (b) the remaining owners, including the Plaintiffs, delegated only L with respect to the management of the building, payment of property tax, etc.; and (c) the instant lease agreement is null and void as it was concluded without the authority of representation. Even if L was delegated with the authority to conclude a lease agreement, only KRW 40 million out of KRW 50,000,000, out of KRW 50,000,000, out of the deposit for lease under the contract; and (d) the instant real estate K (hereinafter “instant subparagraph
-.