배당이의
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that: (a) the debtor and the owner of the case for compulsory auction against B real estate (hereinafter “instant auction case”); (b) the Defendant is pro-friendly; and (c) the lease agreement between C and the Defendant on D ground (hereinafter “instant building”) of the former North Korea, which is a part of the auction case, constitutes a declaration of intention through a false agreement; and (d) the Defendant is the most lessee.
Therefore, the amount of dividend distributed to the defendant in the auction case of this case shall be distributed to the plaintiff.
2. Determination
A. The following facts, which are acknowledged by the Defendant along with the purport of the entire pleadings, are as follows: (a) the Defendant actually resided in the building owned by C from May 29, 2007 to May 2016; (b) the Defendant remitted KRW 20 million to E’s account, which was purchased on September 26, 2008; (c) the money was remitted from the above account to C’s account as of April 27, 2014; and (d) the lease contract was written between the Defendant and C with KRW 20 million as of the above building as of April 27, 2014; and (e) the Defendant received the fixed date thereafter, it is reasonable to deem that the lease contract was concluded between the Defendant and C, and the deposit was paid.
B. On the other hand, the fact that the Defendant and C are a pro rata relationship, and as seen above, the preparation of a lease agreement between the Defendant and C or the fixed date thereof came to reach around 2014, and there was a difference between the time when the Defendant began to live in the instant building and the time when the lease deposit is paid, and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is that the lease agreement between the Defendant and C constitutes the most lessee or the declaration of intention by falsity.