배당이의
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (a) the lower part of the judgment of the court of first instance is used; and (b) the Defendants are identical to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the determination of addition to the allegations emphasized or added by this court; and (c) thus,
Of the rulings of the first instance court, “Defendant D” is changed into “Co-Defendant D Co-Defendant Corporation of the first instance.”
2. Additional determination
A. Defendant B’s assertion 1) Defendant B’s assertion: (a) lent new funds of KRW 300 million to Nonparty Company; (b) concluded a security agreement on the instant corporeal movables owned by Nonparty Company as collateral. Of the aforementioned new funds, KRW 100 million to KRW 130 million was paid to Nonparty Company through J; and (c) the remainder was spent for the test cost of the AF Hospital operated by the Nonparty Company as it was used for the part of the Nonparty Company; (b) even if K or J, the representative director of the Nonparty Company, concealed part of the new funds of KRW 300 million, Defendant B did not constitute a fraudulent act; and thus, (c) Defendant C’s assertion that Defendant C would work as the employee of Nonparty Company from June 2012 to receive KRW 5 million monthly payment.
Therefore, Defendant C has preferential right to payment as a wage obligee, so the instant transfer contract does not constitute a fraudulent act, as it does not harm the joint security of a general creditor.
3) The Plaintiff, in addition to the instant lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution, may file a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution with the Busan District Court 2013Gahap15848, and receive the distribution of KRW 102,154,439 among them. As such, the part exceeding KRW 97,845,561 among the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution constitutes a double claim and thus, is unreasonable. (B) As to Defendant B’s assertion, determination as to Defendant B’s assertion No. 1 is 3.