(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.10.30 2015가단201021

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.10.30 2015가단201021

배당이의

Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts recognized;

A. On September 1, 2009, Korea Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea Bank”) granted a loan of KRW 423 million to C on the security of the instant building owned by C and E as one-half percent of the maximum debt amount (hereinafter “instant mortgage”). As to the instant building, the first priority mortgage (hereinafter “instant mortgage”) was established, which was 57.6 million won of the maximum debt amount.

B. Meanwhile, between January 8, 2013 and C, the Defendant entered into a lease contract with a deposit of KRW 23.5 million for the instant building and the period from February 5, 2013 to February 5, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and completed a move-in report on the instant building on January 31, 2013.

C. On March 11, 2014, the Bank applied for the auction of real estate rent to the Incheon District Court B, based on the instant collateral security, and started the auction procedure on the instant building.

In the above auction procedure, the Defendant reported the right to claim the return of deposit under the instant lease agreement and made a demand for distribution. On January 7, 2015, the auction court prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) stating that the Defendant, who is the lessee of small claims, distributes the amount of KRW 14 million and KRW 464,315,902 to the Plaintiff, who is the creditor of the right to collateral security (the transferor), who is the creditor of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the Plaintiff”).

E. The Plaintiff appeared on the date of the above distribution and raised an objection to the full amount of the Defendant’s dividend.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 8, each of the statements, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant lease agreement is null and void as a false declaration of conspiracy, the primary purpose of which is to be protected as a small lessee, and thus, the Defendant cannot be protected as a small lessee, or C with excess of debt constitutes a fraudulent act and seek revocation thereof.

Therefore, the instant dividend table is distributed to the Defendant.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2015.09.11 2014가단38783

-인천지방법원 2015.08.21 2014가단249842

-인천지방법원 2015.06.26 2014가단228876

-인천지방법원 2015.09.18 2015가단204730

-인천지방법원 2015.10.16 2015가단200318