logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.07.24 2020가단3430
배당이의
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff, as the cause of the claim in this case, has the same assertion as the attached Form No. 1.

2. We examine ex officio the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

In a case where the debtor raises an objection against the distribution schedule prepared in the distribution procedure, the creditor himself/herself who has an executory exemplification of the executory title, i.e., the creditor who has raised an objection as to the existence of a claim or the scope of the claim, shall exclude the executory power of the executory title. As such, a lawsuit demanding an objection

(Article 154(2) of the Civil Execution Act. A judgment with a declaration of provisional execution may not file a lawsuit of demurrer against a claim unless the judgment becomes final and conclusive (Article 44(1) of the Civil Execution Act). However, an obligor may, by appeal, exclude the executory power of the judgment by disputing the existence or scope of claims, and may receive a decision of stay of execution. Thus, an obligor cannot file a lawsuit of demurrer against a judgment with a declaration of provisional execution, on the ground that it is impossible for an obligor to file a lawsuit of demurrer against a creditor with an authentic copy of such judgment,

(see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da86403, Apr. 23, 2015). However, inasmuch as it is obvious that the Defendant is a creditor who participated in the distribution with its executive title upon the Plaintiff’s assertion or based on the record, insofar as the Defendant is an obligee who participated in the distribution with its executive title, it is not permissible to challenge the Defendant by means of a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, such as

3. If so, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and its defects cannot be corrected. Thus, it is decided to dismiss it without holding any pleadings pursuant to Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow