beta
(영문) 전주지방법원 2021.01.14 2020나4792

배당이의

Text

1. The judgment of the first instance is modified as follows.

A. The case of compulsory auction of real estate D with the Jeonju District Court of the United States District Court of the United States.

Reasons

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the part on "1. Basic Facts" among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. Plaintiff 1) The instant assignment order and the Defendant’s seizure and collection order (other than the Jeonju District Court 2019, 100660, hereinafter “instant collection order”) are different from the seized claims, and there is no competition between them.

Therefore, the assignment order of this case is valid.

2) Pursuant to the instant assignment order, KRW 69,916,511 out of the final and conclusive claim in accordance with the instant assignment order is transferred to the Plaintiff, and KRW 69,916,511 out of the said final and conclusive claim shall be paid to the Plaintiff not to the obligor E but to the Plaintiff as the full bond holder.

Therefore, KRW 69,916,511 out of the Defendant’s dividends paid to E should be distributed preferentially to the Plaintiff by the Defendant, and KRW 107,809,808 of the Defendant’s dividends should be reduced to KRW 37,893,297 (=107,809,808 won - KRW 69,916,511).

B. Defendant 1) When the sale price is paid in full in the real estate auction procedure, the execution bond shall be deemed to be changed to or converted into the dividend claim. As long as the sale price was paid in full in the auction procedure of this case, the execution bond of this case, which is the execution bond, was changed to or converted into the claim of dividends to the Republic of Korea, and thus, the seizure claim of this case under the assignment order of this case is identical

Therefore, the assignment order of this case is null and void in competition with seizure.

2) According to the effect of the prohibition of payment of the collection order of this case, the third obligor and the Republic of Korea, upon the effect of the prohibition of payment of the collection order of this case, shall preferentially distribute the part equivalent to the Defendant’s claim out of the dividends to the Defendant

3. Determination as to the cause of action

A. 1) The attachment claim of the assignment order of this case is the claim of the final judgment of this case.