logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.12.17 2014가단31510
배당이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 11, 2012, the procedure for the auction of real estate was initiated on July 11, 2012 with Seoul Southern District Court B with respect to the first floor of the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building No. 1 (hereinafter “instant house”) and the record of the decision on commencement of auction was completed on July 12, 2012.

B. In the above auction procedure, the Plaintiff asserted to the executing court that he is the lessee of the instant house, and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution.

C. On June 3, 2014, the court of auction prepared a distribution schedule stating that E, a small lessee, KRW 16,00,00, KRW 940,140, KRW 257,740, KRW 560, KRW 257,740, KRW 284,560, KRW 284,592, KRW 62,648, KRW 62,82,82,82, and KRW 17,827, was distributed to E, a mortgagee, and the Plaintiff was excluded from the distribution of dividends.

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and raised an objection against KRW 20,00,000 out of the Defendant’s dividend amount, and filed the instant lawsuit on June 9, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 7 through 9, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the lessee who leased the instant house from C on February 10, 2003 to KRW 30,000,000, and paid all the lease deposit, and made a move-in report on February 10, 200, and received on December 24, 2003 and resided on December 24, 2003.

On August 7, 2007, the Plaintiff demanded C to pay KRW 30,000,000 as lease deposit and KRW 10,000 as the housing repair cost of the instant case, but C paid only KRW 10,00,000 out of the lease deposit.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, a small lessee, has the right to receive 20,000,000 won of the remaining lease deposit from the Defendant prior to the Defendant. Therefore, the distribution schedule should be revised as stated in the purport of the claim.

(b) Determination feet, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Gap evidence 9.

arrow