logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.06.03 2015가단117957
사해행위취소 등
Text

1. The distribution schedule prepared on May 7, 2015 by the above court with respect to the Seoul Northern District Court B real estate auction case.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 8, 2006, the New Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “New Bank”) established a collateral security amount of KRW 1 billion with respect to the real estate indicated in the [Attachment List Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by D, the representative director of D, in order to secure a loan obligation against D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”).

B. On August 13, 2010, a new bank extended a loan of KRW 500 million to D as of August 12, 201 on the due date, and C guaranteed the above 500 million loan obligations.

On August 12, 2011, a new bank made a contract with D to reduce the previous loans of KRW 500 million to KRW 450 million and to extend the repayment date on August 12, 2012, and C guaranteed the above loans of KRW 450 million.

C. On June 20, 2014, C entered into a lease agreement between the Defendant and the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the term of KRW 20 million, KRW 400,000 per month, and the term of lease from June 26, 2014 to June 26, 2015.

As to the instant real estate, on September 22, 2014, the Seoul Northern District Court B opened the auction of real estate.

On May 7, 2015, the auction court opened a distribution date and prepared a distribution schedule of KRW 16,000,000 to the Defendant, who is the lessee of small claims, and KRW 521,30,626 to the Plaintiff, who is the mortgagee, (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

On May 12, 2015, the Plaintiff raised an objection to the amount of distribution of the Defendant on the date of distribution, and filed the instant lawsuit.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap 1 through 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On the premise that the Plaintiff received a joint and several surety claim against C from the new bank, the Plaintiff entered into the instant lease agreement with the Defendant, which is the general creditor of C, in excess of debt, resulting in the reduction of the debtor’s whole property.

arrow