logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.05.13 2014가단61271
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 13, 2010, D obtained a loan of KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff, C, on the same day, completed the registration of creation of a mortgage over the first priority priority of KRW 130 million with respect to the real estate stated in the purport of the claim for the registration (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On September 4, 2013, C entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit of KRW 20 million with respect to the instant building (a deposit of KRW 18 million with respect to the remainder of contract deposit of KRW 2 million), monthly rent of KRW 200,000,000 with respect to the instant building, and the lease term of KRW 60,000 for September 6, 2013, which is the remainder date, from September 6, 2013. Accordingly, the Defendant completed the move-in report and the fixed date on the remainder date.

C. However, since June 2013, D had already been in a state of forfeiture of the benefit of time due to delinquency in paying the above loan interest and reimbursement, and on October 31, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction (this Court B) on the instant building.

On September 5, 2014, the execution court distributed the Defendant, who applied for a demand for distribution as a small lessee on the date of distribution on September 5, 2014, the highest repayment amount of KRW 18.2 million, and KRW 68,340,633, which shall be subordinate to the Plaintiff.

(See Annex 6). [See Annex 6] . [See Annex 6: The fact that there is no dispute, each entry in A1 through 5, and No. 7 (including partial number of heading; hereinafter the same shall apply).

[Attachment]

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is the largest tenant as the grounds for objection to the distribution.

In addition to the whole purport of the pleadings and arguments in relation to each statement of evidence No. 6, evidence No. 1, No. 1 through No. 7, No. 1, No. 1 and No. 7, No. 1 and No. 1, No. 1 and No. 1, No. 2000,000 won of the down payment No. 4, Sept. 4, 2013, the defendant transferred to the above broker E’s account and transferred the balance raised from his/her relatives to the above broker E’s account, i.e., the cashier’s checks of KRW 16 million and KRW 2 million in cash (e.g., the defendant’s personal checks of KRW 16 million) to the above broker’s account.

6. C.

arrow