beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Nonparty C’s application for voluntary auction on September 7, 201 (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) with respect to each real estate indicated in the separate sheet, including the Plaintiff’s share of 213.21/675.08 on No. 1 of the Underground 1 Floor of the Building on Land outside Gangdong-gu Seoul, Gangdong-gu, and six parcels of land (hereinafter “instant share”). On December 13, 2011, the Plaintiff asserted that on March 1, 2008, the Plaintiff: (a) filed an application for a lessee’s report on the right and demand for distribution on the instant auction procedure; (b) on March 1, 2008, the Plaintiff occupied on March 10, 200, leased KRW 25,000,000, and occupied on April 17, 2008; and (c) obtained a confirmation date of move-in report.”
B. On June 26, 2014, C sold the said shares to Nonparty 2, Co., Ltd., Ltd., and on July 14, 2014, the registration of transfer of the entire shares C in the name of the said company was completed on July 25, 2014. On July 25, 2014, the execution court: (a) distributed KRW 7,64,800 to Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, a seizure authority (relevant tax) and KRW 238,268,160 to the Defendant, an applicant creditor, respectively, in the second order; and (b) drafted a distribution schedule that does not distribute to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).
C. The Plaintiff appeared on the date of the instant auction procedure, and raised an objection against the Defendant’s dividends.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 and 5, Gap evidence 14-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff leased from C the first floor room of the above E-building, which is a residential building, to KRW 25,000,000, the lease deposit, and then completed the move-in report on March 18, 2008 while moving into a residential area and using it as a residence around March 2008, and obtained a fixed date in the lease contract. However, the plaintiff was also subject to the lease contract prior to the conclusion of the above lease contract.