beta
Text
1. The document prepared on June 4, 2019 by this Court with respect to the case of application for auction of the real estate B in Gyeyang-gu District Court Goyang-gu.
Reasons
1. On June 4, 2019, the auction procedure for the replacement of real estate was in progress with respect to D Apartment E (hereinafter “instant apartment”), which is the foundation of facts C, by Goyang-gu District Court, Goyang-gu, Goyang-gu, Seoul. This court, while distributing the amount to be actually distributed on June 4, 2019 to the Defendant, who is a small lessee, 17,67,000,000 won, and 210,953,086 won, and 210,95,000 won, and 5,724,905 won, each, to G, a collateral security holder, to the Defendant, who is the mortgagee, was distributed to F, a non-mortgage, and prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) that does not distribute to the Plaintiff.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 5, and 6's statements, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The allegations and judgment of the parties
A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff of the parties concerned shall be excluded from the dividend of this case, since the plaintiff is not the most lessee or the small lessee entitled to protection under the Housing Lease Protection Act.
The defendant asserts that he is a legitimate lessee who has lived in the apartment of this case after concluding a lease contract with C and making a move-in report.
B. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 3, 50,00,000 of lease deposit for the instant apartment (a down payment of KRW 5,00,000,000 when entering into a contract, and KRW 45,00,000,00 on December 10, 2016) with respect to the instant apartment, the Defendant and C prepared a lease contract (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) from October 10, 2016 to December 10, 2018 (Provided, That the date of preparation is not indicated in the contract) and the Defendant completed the move-in report for the instant apartment on May 19, 201 to obtain a fixed date at the H Public Welfare Center at the time of Pakistan, after completing the move-in report.
However, considering the following circumstances, the defendant shall be authentic, if it can be recognized by adding up the whole purport of arguments as a result of the Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 1 to 6 evidence Nos. 1 and the result of the order to submit financial data to I.D.