beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2012. 08. 29. 선고 2012나12013 판결

주민등록이 단절된 것으로 볼 수 있을 정도의 기간 내에 전차인의 전입신고가 이루어지지 않았으므로 우선변제권을 행사할 수 없음[국승]

Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Suwon District Court Ansan Branch 201Gadan30239 ( October 15, 2012)

Title

The right to preferential payment shall not be exercised because the relocation report of the former lessee was not made within the extent that it can be deemed that the resident registration was severed;

Summary

(1) In the event that a housing lessee with opposing power has properly sub-leased, if the moving-in report was made within the period to the extent that possession of the sub-lessee is succeeded and that the resident registration is severed, the opposing power of the right to lease held by the original lessee shall continue to exist without maintaining the identity. However, in the case of this case, the moving-in report shall not be deemed to have been made within the period to the extent that the resident registration is severed.

Cases

2012Na12013 Demurrer against distribution

Plaintiff and appellant

Quantity XX

Defendant, Appellant

Republic of Korea and one other

Judgment of the first instance court

Suwon District Court Decision 201Da30239 Decided February 15, 2012

Conclusion of Pleadings

July 25, 2012

Imposition of Judgment

August 29, 2012

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. Among the distribution schedule prepared by the above court on July 22, 2011 with respect to the real estate compulsory auction case No. 2010, the amount of dividends to the defendant Republic of Korea shall be KRW 000, KRW 000, and the amount of dividends to the defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City shall be KRW 00, and KRW 000,000, and the amount of dividends to the plaintiff shall be KRW 000, respectively.

Reasons

The reasoning for the court's explanation concerning this case is the same as the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it refers to the same as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.