logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2011.10.13 2011가단9302
배당이의
Text

1. On February 25, 201, set up by the above court as to the compulsory auction case of Suwon District Court's Sung-nam Branch D real estate D.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs, based on the executory copy of the protocol of mediation with the executory power over the transfer registration of ownership (No. 2005Gahap1110), were to proceed with the auction procedure on November 16, 2008 upon the decision to commence a compulsory auction by this court D on November 16, 2008.

B. Meanwhile, on November 16, 2007, the Defendant: (a) completed the registration of provisional seizure on the instant real estate by this court 2009Kadan51226 on November 16, 2007 with the purchase price of KRW 200 million for E as the claim claim; and (b) issued a payment order on December 27, 2007 with the Suwon District Court 2007Kadan3192 to pay KRW 200 million against E; and (c) the said order was finalized on January 18, 2008.

C. In the above compulsory auction procedure, the above court set up a distribution schedule that distributes the amount of KRW 1,068,755,580 to the defendant to the plaintiff and the defendant 72,543,262,94,729,381, and KRW 94,729,382 to the plaintiff Eul to the defendant at the ratio of 36.27% of each credit amount to the plaintiff and the defendant.

The Plaintiffs appeared on the date of the above distribution, and raised the instant lawsuit after stated an objection against the amount of distribution to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 7-2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs asserted that (1) since the defendant's claim for the purchase price against E is false bonds that do not exist, it is unreasonable to distribute the amount within the scope of the claims that the plaintiffs did not receive as dividends due to the distribution of dividends to the defendant.

(2) As to this, the Defendant: (a) filed a claim against H’s children having substantial authority over G 215802 square meters of land G 215802 square meters (hereinafter “Before subdivision”) in Gwangju-si, which is the land prior to the division of the instant real estate; (b) KRW 200 million on four occasions, around 202.

arrow