beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. On May 22, 2006, Han Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “I Bank”) completed on September 28, 2006, the registration of creation of a collateral security (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant collateral security”) on the first floor of the building E, non-Party D, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and two parcels of land owned by the Plaintiffs on May 22, 2006, with respect to the establishment of a collateral security (hereinafter referred to as “the instant real estate”) of a maximum debt amount of KRW 360 million, the debtor A, and Han Bank, the debtor A, the mortgagee A, and the Han Bank, the Han Bank, the debtor B, and the Han Bank, the establishment of a collateral security (hereinafter referred to as “the instant collateral security”) on August 28, 2006, with respect to the establishment of a collateral security (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant real property”), part of the shares of the Plaintiffs on May 25, 2015.
On June 22, 2011, the Defendant, a special purpose company established under the Asset-Backed Securitization Act, was transferred to the Plaintiff’s collateral security (hereinafter “mortgaged collateral security claim”) as securitized assets by a single bank, which was transferred on April 21, 201 from the Han Bank.
On June 5, 2013, the Defendant filed an application for the auction of real estate rent (hereinafter “instant auction”) with the Seoul Central District Court C on the instant real estate, and in the instant auction, the instant real estate was sold to the Han F&A Loan Co., Ltd on November 9, 2015.
Applicant The auction court opened a date of distribution on December 17, 2015, and prepared a distribution schedule to distribute the amount of KRW 2,725,480,326 to actual dividends, ① 36,003,080 to Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, which is the seizure authority, ② 2,689,47,246 to the Defendant, who is the applicant creditor, who is the mortgagee, respectively.
(v) on December 2015, 2015, the plaintiffs have an objection to the full dividend against the defendant;