beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
According to the evidence evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 3, in the case of a compulsory auction of real estate C with Jinwon District Court Jinwon District Court, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff raised an objection against the defendant, who is a mortgagee on June 15, 2015, who is a right to collateral security regarding real estate indicated in attached Table Nos. 152,424,334 (referred to as the "mortgage No. 35.88%) on June 15, 2015, who is a person entitled to provisional seizure of KRW 50,00,000 (referred to as the "mortgage No. 4, 32.81%) to distribute the amount of KRW 16,405,775 (referred to as the "distribution schedule of this case"), and that the plaintiff raised an objection against the distribution of KRW 120,00,000 out of the defendant's dividends
The plaintiff asserts that the above right to collateral security (hereinafter referred to as the "mortgage of this case") under the name of the defendant is based on false claims, and thus, the distribution schedule of this case should be revised as stated in the purport of the claim.
In a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, the burden of proof as to the grounds for objection against distribution is in accordance with the principle of distribution of the burden of proof in general civil procedure. Therefore, in a case where the plaintiff claims that the defendant's claim has not been constituted, the defendant is liable to prove the facts of the cause of the claim, and in a case where the plaintiff claims that the claim has become invalid as a false declaration
(2) The Defendant loaned KRW 320,000,000 to E on September 30, 2014 and KRW 100,00,000 on March 20, 205 as interest rate of 24%, and as a joint and several surety for the Defendant’s respective loan obligations against the Defendant, ② as between D and D on September 30, 2014, the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s respective loan obligations against the Defendant, and as between D and D on September 30, 2014, the maximum amount of claims regarding the attached real estate indicated in the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 2-1, 2-3, and 3.