beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.07.07 2016가단203756

배당이의

Text

1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 27, 2015, the Plaintiff (Appointed) and the designated parties (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) completed the provisional disposition registration of each of the prohibition of disposal on the ground that they claim for the cancellation of ownership transfer registration on March 27, 2015, the right to claim the cancellation of ownership transfer registration was a preserved right.

B. On February 3, 2015, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage of the debtor F and the maximum debt amount of KRW 150 million with respect to each of the instant real property.

C. On June 22, 2015, the Defendant filed an application for voluntary auction with the Daejeon District Court C, and the said court, on February 17, 2016, prepared a distribution schedule that distributes KRW 150 million to the Defendant on the date of distribution.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. A lawsuit of demurrer against a distribution on the market is sought for the modification of a distribution schedule or the preparation of a new distribution schedule to reduce the amount distributed to himself/herself by reducing the amount distributed to the persons entered in the distribution schedule. Therefore, in order for the plaintiff to win a lawsuit of demurrer against a distribution, the plaintiff must assert and prove that the plaintiff is not sufficiently able to assert and prove that there is no claim of the defendant and that he/she has the right to receive a distribution of the

(see, i.e., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da42259, Jul. 12, 2012), i.e., the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant’s claim did not exist, and the Plaintiff did not assert any assertion or prove that he/she has the right to receive dividends from the Defendant. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is without merit without further need.

3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.