(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.08.26 2015가단29847

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) 인천지방법원 2015.08.26 2015가단29847

배당이의의 소

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, as a creditor against Nonparty C, completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage at KRW 5,900,000 with respect to the debtor C, the mortgagee, the maximum debt amount, and the maximum debt amount, KRW 55,90,00 with respect to D7,201, Dong-gu, Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On July 16, 2013, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with C on the condition that the instant real estate will be leased by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 22,00,000 as well as the lease term from July 30, 2013 to July 29, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. As C did not pay interest, the Plaintiff applied for an auction on the instant real estate. On January 20, 2014, the decision to commence the auction on the instant real estate was made to the Incheon District Court B with respect to the instant real estate. In the real estate auction procedure, on February 3, 2014, the Defendant filed a report on the right of KRW 22,00,000 with respect to the instant real estate and demand for distribution, and the said court, on May 22, 2015, distributes KRW 22,00,000 to the Defendant, who is a lessee of small claims, as the first priority on May 22, 2015, and distributes KRW 28,846,222 to the Plaintiff, who is the applicant creditor, as the third priority (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

On May 28, 2015, the Plaintiff stated an objection to the entire amount distributed to the Defendant on the date of distribution, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution of the instant case.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 3 (if there are additional numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is unclear about the reason why the defendant leased the real estate of this case, and although the defendant knew that the special contract of this case was entered into with the knowledge that the plaintiff's right to collateral security was created, the defendant argued that the contract of this case was concluded because the right to collateral security was not secured at

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2015.12.23 2015가단46590

-인천지방법원 2015.11.04 2015가단13439

-인천지방법원 2015.09.16 2015가단36807

-인천지방법원 2015.11.04 2014가단259450

-인천지방법원 2015.09.23 2015가단222134