beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' lawsuits against the defendant are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. H applied for a compulsory auction of real estate at H on November 27, 2001 for a compulsory auction of real estate (hereinafter “instant compulsory auction”) to the above court on the basis of the original copy of the protocol with executory power over the case No. 99Dahap2624, 2000Gahap20543 (Counterclaim) (hereinafter “instant protocol”) and upon the obligor I’s transfer of real estate under the Suwon District Court D, E (Joint), F (Dual), G (Dual) with respect to the multi-family house on the ground of J, K’s transfer of real estate (hereinafter “instant compulsory auction”). On October 12, 2004, Suwon District Court 9Da93948 (hereinafter “instant judgment”). Based on the executory power of the judgment of Suwon District Court 9Da93948 (hereinafter “instant judgment”).
B. On April 4, 201, the Defendant: (a) received the claim from H on the instant judgment against H on April 4, 201; and (b) filed an application for succession of the obligee with the auction court of this case for compulsory auction on July 22, 199, “the principal amount of KRW 13,693,220, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of KRW 25% per annum from July 22, 199 to the date of full payment; and (c) “the principal amount of KRW 225,00,000 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of KRW 25% per annum from April 1, 2002 to the date of full payment (hereinafter “instant claim transfer agreement”); and (d) received the assigned execution clause as the assignee of each claim under the instant judgment and the conciliation protocol, and submitted the application for succession of the compulsory auction to the creditor on August 3, 2011.
C. On January 28, 2014, the date of distribution of the compulsory auction of this case, the court of auction 106,458,022 won was stated in the creditor column as “H” (hereinafter “the dividend of this case”).
(2) When Plaintiff A, as a lessee and lien holder, demanded a distribution during the compulsory auction procedure of this case as the lessee and lien holder, but was excluded from the distribution, Plaintiff A appeared on the date of distribution, and Plaintiff B appeared on the date of distribution, with respect to KRW 30 million out of the dividend of this case, and Plaintiff B.