배당이의
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The plaintiff's assertion that the auction court prepared a distribution schedule that distributes KRW 2 million to the defendant on November 25, 2014, on the ground that the defendant is a small lessee with the top priority repayment right over the auction real estate, but the above distribution schedule should be revised as stated in the purport of the claim, since there is no claim to return the lease deposit of the defendant. 2. We examine ex officio as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case. A person who is standing to sue against distribution is present on the date of distribution on the date of distribution and raises an objection as to the distribution schedule (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Da63155, Sept. 4, 2002; 2003Da27696, Aug. 22, 2003). Meanwhile, Article 154 (1) of the Civil Execution Act provides that the plaintiff shall file a lawsuit of demurrer against other creditors.
Article 2(3) of the Civil Act provides that “When a creditor who has raised an objection fails to submit a document attesting the fact that the creditor has filed a lawsuit under paragraph (1) with the court of execution within one week from the date of distribution, such objection shall be deemed to have been withdrawn.” This purport is to seek early mitigation of the distribution and prevent the creditor from hindering the execution of the distribution by filing an application of a demurrer against distribution without any ground. Thus, if a creditor who has raised an objection against another creditor fails to prove the lawsuit with the court of execution within one week from the date of distribution, the creditor shall be deemed to have withdrawn the objection without asking whether the lawsuit of demurrer against a distribution was filed before and after the period of proof of the lawsuit of demurrer against a distribution is filed.
On November 25, 2014, the Plaintiff appeared at the auction procedure of the instant case on the date of distribution opened on November 25, 2014, and raised an objection against the Defendant’s amount of distribution.