beta
Text
1. Of the table prepared by this Court on March 28, 2014 in this Court D, E, F (Consolidated) auction of real estate, this Court shall:
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Seoul Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Decision on the Commencement of Auction of Real Estate under this Court D, E, and F (Joint) was rendered with respect to Nos. 401, 402, 501, and 202 of the 4th floor, 501, and 202 of the 5th floor and 4th floor.
B. Accordingly, on March 28, 2014, on the date of distribution of the above auction procedure, the court drafted a distribution schedule with the content of allocating KRW 14,592,415 to the Defendant Company reported KRW 340,000 to the Plaintiff, the applicant creditor of the maximum debt amount of KRW 150,000,000, and KRW 120,000,000 with the claim for return of the lease deposit against G, and KRW 14,592,415 with the claim for return of the lease deposit against G, and KRW 6,874,206 with the claim for construction payment under the construction contract entered into with G.
C. The Plaintiff raised an objection against the Defendants’ respective dividend amount on the date of the above distribution, and on April 3, 2014, prior to the lapse of one week thereafter, on April 3, 2014, to the instant court. D.
On the other hand, Defendant B filed a lawsuit with the Korean Licensed Real Estate Agent Association seeking the payment of mutual aid money (No. 201Ga388554) on the grounds that the tort related to I’s intermediary act, which is the broker of the above lease contract, was unable to recover the above lease deposit, and this court rendered a judgment on July 9, 2012 that “the above Association shall pay Defendant B the amount of KRW 100,000,000, which is the limit of mutual aid money out of the above deposit, to Defendant B,” and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
E. Accordingly, on August 3, 2012, the said Association paid the above KRW 100,000,000 to Defendant B.
【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of the above recognition of the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B’s claim for the refund of the above lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000 remain, and Defendant B’s claim for the refund of the above lease deposit amount of KRW 120,000,000 (= KRW 100,000,000 received from the above Association).