beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.
2. As to the real estate stated in the separate sheet between the Defendant and B, May 2012.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The establishment of the right to collateral security and the bankruptcy (1) B of the Solomon Savings Bank Co., Ltd. was loaned KRW 182,00,000 from the Solomon Savings Bank (hereinafter “ Solomon Savings Bank”), and on September 5, 2008, the establishment of the right to collateral security and the bankruptcy (236,60,000 won was completed with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list to Solomon Savings Bank (hereinafter “the instant real estate”).
(2) The Solomon Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on April 30, 2013 in the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Hahap46, and the Plaintiff was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy of the Solomon Savings Bank.
B. (1) The Plaintiff filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate with the Incheon District Court C as to the instant real estate, as it was unable to obtain the repayment of the principal and interest of the loan from B, and the decision to commence the auction of the instant real estate was rendered on July 11, 2013 (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).
(2) On May 24, 2012, the Defendant entered into a lease contract (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with respect to the instant real estate between B and B by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 24,00,000, and the period from June 7, 2012 to June 6, 2014, and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution with the court of execution by asserting that the move-in report was completed on June 7, 2012.
(3) On April 28, 2014, the court of execution determined that the Defendant is a small lessee of the amount stipulated in the Housing Lease Protection Act, and prepared a distribution schedule of KRW 20,000,00 among KRW 156,218,641, which is to be actually distributed to the Defendant, and that the Defendant distributes KRW 136,218,641 to the Plaintiff, respectively (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”), and the Plaintiff stated an objection against the entire amount distributed to the Defendant on the date of distribution.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 5-1 through 3, Gap evidence 10, Gap evidence 11, Eul evidence 1-1, and arguments.