(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.11.01 2019가단10176

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.11.01 2019가단10176

배당이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The following facts are found to be without dispute between the parties, or recognized in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings:

A. On September 26, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D and E claiming a loan amount of KRW 2013 Gahap2803, the Suwon District Court rendered a judgment that “D and E jointly pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 300 million and the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 24% per annum from September 8, 2012 to the date of full payment.”

B. The Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order against E’s wage claim as Suwon District Court 2015TT4267 by deeming the claim pursuant to the above judgment as the preserved claim.

C. According to the above seizure and collection order, the distribution procedure for the amount of KRW 8,298,860 out of the amount deposited by Suwon District Court No. 6249 in 2017 (hereinafter “instant distribution procedure”) was commenced. D.

In the distribution procedure of this case, the above court prepared a distribution schedule that distributes KRW 5,362,141 to the plaintiff and the defendant 2,936,719 to the defendant, with the plaintiff and the defendant in the same order.

E. Accordingly, on April 17, 2019, the Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution of the instant distribution procedure and raised an objection to the whole amount of the Defendant’s dividends.

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion E was in collusion with G that caused G to report false claims, and the Defendant’s claim against E in the instant dividend procedure seems to be a false claim.

Therefore, the distribution of dividends to the defendant in the distribution procedure of this case is unfair.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the respective descriptions and arguments of Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 5-1, 2, Eul evidence No. 6-1, 2, and 3, the following facts are recognized:

1) From September 21, 2006 to September 30, 2009, the Defendant lent a total of KRW 218.7 million to D. (2) The Defendant extended a loan amount of KRW 200 million between D and D on December 4, 2010.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2019.11.01 2019가단10169

-부산지방법원동부지원 2017.09.28 2016가단20260

-수원지방법원여주지원 2019.03.05 2019가단724

-수원지방법원평택지원 2016.12.06 2016가단41918

-수원지방법원 2018.03.29 2017나4482