배당이의
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The reasons for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments as to the matters alleged in the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The addition;
A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s purchase of the instant real estate was agreed to allow the Plaintiff to resell the land immediately after the purchase of the instant real estate, and that the purchase price was KRW 4,08,000,000 in return for such an agreement, the Defendant prepared a sales contract and paid taxes, such as registration tax, etc. accordingly, but the Defendant did not implement the said agreement.
In addition, even though the unpaid purchase price is merely KRW 250 million, the Defendant rejected the request for reduction of the maximum debt amount of the instant right to collateral security.
The Plaintiff sustained damages due to the above tort committed by the Defendant, and offsets the Defendant’s claim for the above damage against the Defendant’s claim for the purchase price, and there is no extinguishment of all of the purchase price obligations, which are the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security, so the distribution schedule should be revised to distribute the amount of dividends to the Plaintiff.
B. Since there is no evidence to acknowledge that the purchase of the instant real estate between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was agreed to allow the Plaintiff to resell the said real estate by immediately dividing it, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.
Furthermore, in light of the fact that the Defendant, a seller, has no profit from preparing the purchase price under a contract with higher level than the actual transaction price, it is difficult to deem the existence of a side agreement as evidence to acknowledge the existence of such an agreement.
Furthermore, in light of the nature of the right to collateral security, which covers claims for increase or decrease or change, the defendant who is the right to collateral security.