logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.11.03 2015가단53816
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, Defendant C, Defendant C, Defendant C, Defendant D, Defendant D, 3,653,957 won, and Defendant G, and Defendant K-si, 94,046 won.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 8, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the F to use the lease deposit amount of KRW 70,000,000 as to the Yeongdeungpo-gu G Apartment 102 Dong 301 (hereinafter “102 Dong 301”), and paid all of them to F, by paying the lease deposit amount of KRW 7 million on March 8, 2013, KRW 13 million on March 18, 2013, and KRW 50,000 on April 3, 2013.

In addition, the plaintiff completed a move-in report on April 102 301, 201 and received a fixed date in the lease contract.

B. On October 9, 2012, a joint collateral security mortgage was created with respect to real estate (G apartment 101, 102, 201, 202, 202, 301, 302, 401, 402, 402, and 102, 101, 201, 202, 302, 302, 302, and 401, 302, and 103, 201, 202, 401, and 403, 201, 302, and 103, 202, 302, and 402, and 103, 201, 301, 302, 302, 402, and 401, and 402).

C. As above, the Korea Asset Management Corporation proceeds with respect to the public auction of 102, 301, and 302 out of the real estate on which the joint collateral security was created.

Therefore, the Plaintiff submitted a claim report and a request for distribution with respect to the above lease deposit claim as to 102 301 and 151,895,230 won to the Chang Chang Mutual Savings Bank in the first order, 4,764,440 won for disposition on default, 452,420 won for disposition on default, 452, and 3 in the second order, and 151,895,230 won for the above lease deposit claim. The Plaintiff did not have been fully distributed.

After a public auction is conducted with respect to 102, 301 and 302, this Court H and I(Du1431) with respect to the remaining real estate among the real estate under section 2012-1431 of the above list of joint security.

The proceedings were initiated on May 7, 2015, and this Court was conducted with Defendant B 23,378,128, and 42,158,028 won to Defendant C, and 29,782,323 won to Defendant D, and the Defendant Young-si (76,683 won to the waterworks business office);

arrow