logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.13 2016가단5134993
배분이의의 소
Text

1. The main part of the lawsuit in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The Defendants are Korea Asset Management Corporation.

Reasons

1. We examine the legitimacy of the main claim part of the lawsuit in this case, ex officio, as to the legitimacy of the main claim part of the lawsuit in this case.

On the other hand, a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution constitutes a lawsuit of legal formation under the Civil Procedure Act by a creditor, etc. who has an objection to the distribution schedule, who seeks alteration of the distribution schedule prepared by the distribution court after filing a substantive objection to the distribution schedule. As such, a lawsuit of formation aimed at forming a change in existing legal relations is not permissible unless there is a clear provision in the law and there is no legal basis (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Da35462, Sept. 14, 1993). Articles 80 through 84 of the National Tax Collection Act, which provide for distribution in the public sale procedure, provide for distribution method against the proceeds of the sale of the Korea Asset Management Corporation, the agent of the head of a tax office or the head of a tax office, the preparation of distribution statement, the procedure for raising an objection against the distribution statement, and the deposit of distributed money, etc., and does not provide for distribution equivalent to a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution under the Civil Execution Act, or the provisions that provide for distribution under Article 154 of the Civil Execution Act.

Therefore, it is unlawful for the Plaintiff to seek correction of the instant distribution statement itself by filing a lawsuit of demurrer against the Defendants as a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution equivalent thereto, as it is unlawful.

2. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;

(b) (1) Defendant A: Judgment by service by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act) (2) on Defendant Il-ho B’s asset loan: Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

3. Thus, the part of the main claim in the lawsuit in this case is unlawful and dismissed, and it is against the plaintiff's defendants.

arrow