배당이의
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a creditor with C the amount of KRW 636,197,579 under the payment order finalized by Seoul Central District Court No. 2015 tea 56343.
B. On July 22, 2008, C completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage against the Defendant with respect to the land of 539 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by the Defendant, the maximum debt amount of KRW 7.2 million, the debtor C, and the mortgagee as the Defendant.
(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). C.
Upon the plaintiff's application, the decision of voluntary decision to commence the auction on the land of this case was rendered by the court B.
In the above auction procedure, on May 23, 2019, a distribution schedule was prepared to distribute KRW 7.2 million to the Defendant, who is the first mortgagee, the second mortgagee, and KRW 3,301,515 to the Plaintiff, who is the second mortgagee (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”). D.
The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and stated an objection, and filed the instant lawsuit on May 28, 2019.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment thereon
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion did not exist the secured debt, and even if there exists a snowhouse, the extinctive prescription was completed.
Therefore, the instant dividend table should be revised to delete the dividend amount of the Defendant based on the non-existence or extinguished collateral security right and distribute it to the Plaintiff.
B. In light of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3’s overall purport of the pleadings, the Defendant’s lending KRW 6 million to C around July 2, 2008 (hereinafter “instant loan”) and the establishment of the instant right to collateral security with the secured claim can be acknowledged.
The Plaintiff’s assertion that the secured claim of the instant right to collateral security does not exist is unacceptable.
We examine whether the extinctive prescription of the above secured claim has expired or not.
The loan claim of this case was created on July 22, 2008, and the distribution schedule of this case.