beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 30, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the rental deposit amount of KRW 70,000,000 as to one room among the instant apartment units Nos. 15 and 701 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
B. On December 31, 2014, the Plaintiff received a fixed date from the instant lease agreement and filed a move-in report on the instant apartment on the same day. On May 19, 2015, the new bank, a stock company, filed an application for a real estate rental auction on the instant apartment on the same day. On July 16, 2015, the Plaintiff demanded the said auction procedure to pay KRW 70,000,000, alleging that it is a lessee with a fixed date on the lease agreement.
C. On July 29, 2016, the Seoul East Eastern District Court prepared a distribution schedule by allocating surplus 392,206,160 won to the Defendant, excluding the Plaintiff reported as lessee on the date of distribution of the instant apartment in the Seoul East Eastern District Court C real estate auction case.
The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and raised an objection against KRW 70,00,000 out of the amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on August 4, 2016.
E. On the other hand, on June 22, 2016, the Defendant’s Intervenor issued a collection order (Seoul Eastern District Court 2016TTTTTT 53100) against the dividend against the Defendant, and participated in the instant case on February 14, 2017.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5, Gap evidence 13, Eul evidence 2 (including provisional number), the purport of whole pleadings]
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserts that since the plaintiff is a legitimate tenant with respect to one square column among the apartment of this case, the amount equivalent to KRW 70,000,000 should be paid to the plaintiff, the defendant joining the defendant should be excluded from the distribution of dividends because the plaintiff constitutes the most lessee.