beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Determination on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit
A. A lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is sought for the modification of a distribution schedule or the preparation of a new distribution schedule in order to reduce the amount distributed to himself/herself by reducing the amount distributed to a person entered in the distribution schedule. As such, the Plaintiff ought to assert and prove that the Plaintiff is not sufficient to assert and prove that there is no claim of the Defendant in order to win the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, and that he/she has the right to receive dividends of the amount distributed to the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da42259, Jul. 12, 2012). In addition, the distribution to the Defendant is unlawful (see
Even if there is no increase in the amount to be distributed to the plaintiff due to such increase, such a cause may not be a ground for the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution seeking an increase in the amount of dividends.
(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da50270 delivered on January 25, 1994, etc.). B.
If the purport of the whole pleadings is added to the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 of the evidence Nos. 1-1, the plaintiff submitted the claim statement of KRW 172,987,867 to the distribution procedure of the auction case stated in the purport of the claim and received 100% distribution from the plaintiff. Even if the distribution of the claim against the defendant for domestic affairs is illegal, the amount to be distributed to the plaintiff can not be increased accordingly. Thus, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case has no interest in lawsuit
(On the other hand, since the judgment on a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution only affects the parties, the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution filed by other creditors against the plaintiff is irrelevant to the lawsuit of this case). 2. Conclusion, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed as unlawful and it is so decided as per Disposition.