logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원평택지원 2014.11.04 2014가단6140
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. The Plaintiff loaned KRW 50,000,00 to C (D) (the owner of the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and secured the instant real estate by the Suwon District Court No. 4675, Dec. 18, 2008, set the right to collateral security of KRW 65,000,000 for the maximum debt amount as the receipt on December 18, 2008.

B. The instant real estate was purchased and sold to E, and the ownership transfer registration of E was completed on or around December 30, 2010.

C. C’s delay in the repayment of the principal and interest of the above loan obligation, and the Plaintiff’s application (round June 2013) led to the voluntary auction procedure in Suwon District Court Suwon District Court B (hereinafter “instant voluntary auction procedure”). D.

In the instant auction procedure, the instant real estate was sold to F, and KRW 43,919,778, including the proceeds from the sale, was distributed to creditors.

E. During the instant voluntary auction procedure, the Defendant reported the right to lease and made a demand for distribution to the small lessee who entered into a lease contract with E, the owner of the instant real estate in KRW 10,000,000 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

F. On April 16, 2014, the Suwon District Court drafted a distribution schedule that distributes KRW 10,00,00 to the Defendant, KRW 61,90 to Pyeongtaek-si, and KRW 33,857,878 to the Plaintiff, respectively, (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”). The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the Defendant on April 22, 2014, and then filed the instant lawsuit on April 22, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4, 8, 10 evidence (including the number of pages), the whole purport of pleading

2. The plaintiff asserts that since the defendant's appearance of small lessee was a false tenant who formed the appearance of small lessee in order to preferentially receive dividends during the voluntary auction procedure for the real estate of this case, the amount of 10,000,000 won against the defendant in the distribution schedule of this case should be entirely deleted and distributed again to the plaintiff.

arrow