(영문) 춘천지방법원원주지원 2020.01.21 2019가단2550

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) 춘천지방법원원주지원 2020.01.21 2019가단2550

배당이의

Text

1. It is prepared by the same court as of August 29, 2019 with respect to the case of the voluntary auction of real estate E in the Chuncheon District Court, the original district court.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 29, 2019, on the date of distribution implemented on August 29, 2019, the said auction court drafted a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) stating that the Defendant as the first priority lessee shall be KRW 17,000,000, and that the Plaintiff as the third collective security holder shall be the third collective security holder and distribute KRW 27,492,417 (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

B. The Plaintiff appeared on the above date of distribution and raised an objection against the Defendant among the distribution schedule of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, significant facts in this court, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is the most lessee who intends to prepare a false lease contract and receive the distribution of dividends to the defendant, and sought additional distribution to him, and the defendant asserts that he is the actual lessee.

In full view of the overall purport of the argument between the Defendant and H, the owner of the instant real estate, as to whether the Defendant actually leased, the following facts were established: (a) the lease agreement was concluded between the Defendant and H on June 19, 2017; (b) monthly rent of KRW 300,000; and (c) the lease agreement was concluded between June 19, 2017; and (d) June 19, 2017; and (b) the Defendant transferred his resident registration to H on January 29, 2018, even though it was recognized that the Defendant transferred his resident registration to H on June 30, 2016, which was six months prior to the conclusion of the lease agreement; (b) there was no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant paid the lease deposit at the time of the lease agreement or paid the monthly rent thereafter; and (c) in light of the Defendant’s existing domicile and business entity as Gwangju Metropolitan City’s location, it is difficult to view the Defendant as the actual lessee.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the defendant is the small lessee.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2020.01.21 2019가단2550

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2019.10.29 2018가단306217

-서울서부지방법원 2016.10.26 2015가단241436

-수원지방법원안산지원 2020.01.17 2019가단62713