배당이의
1. Of the distribution schedule prepared on June 27, 2014 by the above court with respect to the auction case of real estate B in Seoul Eastern District Court.
1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 11, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 5, and purport of the whole pleadings);
A. The Defendant, who was owned by C, filed an application for voluntary auction of the instant real estate with the Seoul Eastern District Court B on October 15, 2013, as a mortgagee (the maximum bond amount of KRW 650,000,000, and the debtor C) of the right to collateral security (the instant real estate) against the Songpa-gu Seoul District Court No. 106, 1207 (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
B. At the above auction procedure around December 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that himself is a lessee who leased the instant real estate from C with a deposit of KRW 27,00,000,000, and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution.
C. On June 27, 2014, when distributing the amount of KRW 579,65,00,00, which is to be distributed by adding interest to the proceeds from sale of the instant real estate on the date of distribution and deducting the execution cost, the said auction court, in the first priority order, prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes the remainder of KRW 578,457,404 to the Defendant, who is the creditor (mortgage), who is the creditor, in the second priority order (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”), and the Plaintiff was excluded from the distribution.
On July 3, 2014, the Plaintiff appeared on the date of the above distribution, and stated an objection against KRW 20,00,000 among the amount distributed in the second order to the Defendant, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution with the instant court on July 3, 2014, within seven days thereafter.
2. The plaintiff alleged by the parties is the genuine small-sum lessee who has completed the move-in report for resident registration by paying the deposit for the actual lease on the instant real estate with C, and thus, the plaintiff is entitled to receive 20,000,000 won prior to the defendant in the said distribution procedure. On the contrary, the defendant is merely the one who, in collusion with C and as the most lessee who entered into a lease contract as a fraudulent act, has abused the right to preferential distribution of the small-sum lease.