beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.10.16 2017가단8361

배당이의

Text

1. Of the distribution schedule prepared on March 27, 2017 by the said court with respect to the Daegu District Court B and C’s auction of real estate.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the building E, 106, 1006, 106, and 1006, 106, and 106 (hereinafter “instant real estate”). As to the instant real estate, the Defendant is a corporation that completed the additional registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “instant collateral security”) received by the Daegu District Court No. 15051, Apr. 18, 2013, on the ground of the transfer of confirmed claim on July 21, 2016, with respect to the instant real estate as the maximum debt amount of KRW 100,00,000, and the Plaintiff and the mortgagee F. of the Daegu District Court’s registration (hereinafter “instant collateral security”).

B. In the Daegu District Court B, 7234 real estate auction case (hereinafter “instant auction case”), the said court drafted a distribution schedule to distribute KRW 25,145,850 to the Defendant on March 27, 2017, and G, the Plaintiff’s agent, attended on the date of distribution on the same day, and stated that there was an objection against the whole amount of the dividends of the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion was merely made at the time of setting up the right to collateral on the instant real estate by lending money to H with respect to the business of G, which is a fraudulent party, and the instant right to collateral security is null and void as there is no legal act establishing the right to collateral security since it did not borrow money to F, nor was F set up the right to collateral security. Even if the instant right to collateral security exists, the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 143,823,500 to H by paying a total of KRW 143,823,50 from March 15, 2013 to December 23, 2013, and thus, the amount of dividends to the Defendant who acquired the right to collateral security without any such right to collateral should be deleted.

3. In principle, the creditor and the mortgagee should be the same person when the establishment of a collateral is registered for the purpose of collateral security.