2015 Gohap 541213 Confirmation of Claim for Payment of Deposit Money

1. Case accident insurance for a stock company;

Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government tero 117 (Seongdong, K non-life insurance building)

Representative Director Kim Byung-Hun

2. Daegu Bank;

Daegu Suwon-gu 2310 (Nengdong 2 A) as the punishment

Rule 200

3. The National Federation of Community Credit Cooperatives;

Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 114-ro 20 (Seoul-dong)

Kim Sung-sung (Representative of Credit Mutual Aid Project)

4. Opium Capital Co., Ltd.;

Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Tehro 414 (Mota-dong)

the representative secretary under his/her supervision

5. The limited liability insurance company.

Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu 56 (Inndodong-dong) as Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

Representative Director Park le-sik

6. Bankruptcy creditors of Seoul Mutual Savings Bank;

Jung-gu Seoul Central District Cheongcheon-ro 30 (Da-dong)

Service Place, Jung-gu, Seoul, 242, 702 (Jaeong Dong 1, 100)

President of the Republic of Korea:

Legal Representative Park Byung-kil

Sscen Investment ( Singapore) Titro.ELTd (Mercer Invest (Singare) Pte.Ltd)

Singapore Won Pack 1 07-01 Roffle Roffle Roffle Roffle Roffle Roffle Roffle Roffle Robre)

대표이사 윌리 와이 램 웡(Willie Wai-Lam Wong)

Manos Co.

Jung-gu Seoul Central District Court Decision 38,15 stories (Jengdong, MJ credit information)

Odilution by the representative director

A limited liability company specialized in rinkio dye-backed securitization

Jung-gu Seoul Central District Court Decision 38,15 stories (Jengdong, MJ credit information)

Odilution by the representative director

Han-Investment Securities Corporation

Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu 56 (Inndo-dong, Modern Non-Life Insurance Building)

Representative Director Dok-hee

Law Firm Hun-Ga, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Jeong Tae-tae, Yang-ju, Gyeong-ho

1. Kim Min-young;

Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu 62, 1103 (Banbage, air exhausters, and air exhausters)

Law Firm Mai (Law Firm, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Attorney By-law, Attorney By-law, Attorney Park Chang-chul, Counsel for the higher-ranking, Cho Chang-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant,

2. Gambling;

Songpa-ro 31-ro 27,103 1205 (bloak, clono apartment) of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

3. A steering room;

South Yangyang-si, 65-2, 101 Dong 1903 ( Hopyeong-dong, Rain apartment)

September 13, 2017

October 25, 2017

1. On December 26, 2013, the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd. confirms that the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenors’ claim for payment of deposit has been filed against the Intervenor’s succeeding intervenors, as to KRW 1,960,00,00, out of KRW 20,463,595,815, deposited by Seoul Central District Court No. 20157, Dec. 26, 2013.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Occurrence of a claim for payment of deposit money;

(a) Facts of recognition;

1) Status of business-related persons

On April 10, 2010, the private district housing association has obtained approval of the project plan from the head of Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on the implementation of the project (hereinafter “instant project”). The plaintiff (ex officio) and Solomon Savings Bank, Solomon Savings Bank, Co., Ltd., Ltd., Maritime Savings Bank, Fair Savings Bank, and Korea Savings Bank, Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter “the second main group”) are the lending institution, and the construction company (hereinafter “YI branch construction company at that time; hereinafter “YI”) is the commencement of the said project, and the Housing City Guarantee Corporation (hereinafter “Korea Housing Guarantee Corporation”) is the sales guarantee company of the said project.

(ii) business-related loans, etc.

A) On April 8, 2008, the private district housing association borrowed a total of KRW 54,00,000 from the financial institutions, such as the Plaintiff (ex officio), Daegu Bank, the Federation of Community Credit Cooperatives, the ASEAN Capital Co., Ltd., the Korea Commercial Damage Insurance Co., Ltd., and the Non-Party East Mutual Savings Bank, etc., in order to raise funds necessary for the said project, and received a loan of KRW 30,000,000,000 in total from the second part of the second part of the 2nd part of November 27, 2009.

B) On January 27, 2010, the private district housing association concluded a business and loan agreement (a certificate No. 2 of this case; hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) that changes the conditions of the existing loan after obtaining a new loan from the Plaintiff (Withdrawal) K non-life insurance Co., Ltd. (S.) and the Seoul Mutual Savings Bank. The first district association including the said Plaintiff (Withdrawal) and the said association concluded a business and loan agreement that changes the conditions of the existing loan (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) with the aforementioned new loan on the same day. Accordingly, the loans owed by the said association to the first district group were KRW 70,000,000 in total.

C) On November 9, 2010, the first Jeju District Housing Association, etc. entered into an agreement with the Korea Housing Guarantee Association on the method of the performance of guaranteed obligations and the disposal of profits after the completion of the project (Evidence A 3; hereinafter referred to as the “instant agreement”), and the parts related to the instant case in the contents of the said agreement are as follows (as follows, “A” refers to the Korea Housing Guarantee, and “B” refers to the loan-related interested parties, including the first Jeju District Housing Association).

Article 5 (Disposition of Proceeds from the Project after Implementation of Guarantee for Sale) (1) "B" shall, if there is any remaining proceeds, excluding expenses necessary for "A" to complete the responsibility for the performance of guarantee for sale of the project due to a guarantee accident, etc., and to dispose of such proceeds in the following order, and shall not raise any objection thereto: Provided, That if the project undertaker files an application for rehabilitation procedures, the project undertaker shall comply with the authorization of the rehabilitation plan: The first second second second second second second second second second second second second second second second second second second second second second second second of the loan of the lending institution (limited to loans supported by the project undertaker): the project undertaker.

3) Progress of the project

On April 1, 2011, the rehabilitation procedure for the building and management commenced on April 1, 201, a guarantee accident (Article 1(4)(a)) stipulated in the terms and conditions of the house sale guarantee (Article 1(3)) issued by the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd., and the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd. (Article 1(4)(a) was selected as the method of performing the guaranteed obligation under the said terms and conditions, and the Korea Housing Guarantee Co., Ltd. (Article 8) continued the construction. Since then, the instant apartment was completed and sold in lots.

4) A collection order against the Defendants’ seizure and collection order

Defendant Kim Young-young was sent to the Housing Guarantee on October 24, 2012, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment in the Seoul Central District Court 201Gahap72283 case, and on October 19, 2012, with respect to KRW 500,000,000 among the claims for proceeds from the sale of housing against the Housing Association in the private-dong District Housing Association (the above court 2012TTT3240), and with respect to the above claims seizure and collection order, the above claims seizure and collection order were served to the Housing Guarantee on October 24, 2012. Defendant Park Young-young, and Cho Young-young was sent to the Certified Copy of an executory deed prepared by the Gangwon General Law Firm, Law Firm 1025, which was executed on September 26, 2013 by a notary public, with respect to the above Defendants' claims seizure and collection order of KRW 730,000,000 for each of the above claims for proceeds from sale (the above bonds seizure order against the court 20393.

(v)the remaining proceeds of the house guarantee;

After the liability for the guarantee of sale in lots was fully terminated, 20,463,595,815 won of the proceeds from sale in lots were left. On December 30, 2013, the Korea Housing Guarantee was made by mixing the above remaining proceeds under the latter part of Article 487 of the Civil Act and Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act with the Seoul Central District Court (hereinafter “the deposit in this case”) on the ground that “The payment of the remaining proceeds from sale in lots is in dispute between the private-dong District Housing Association and the private-dong District Housing Association, and the loan institution, and it is difficult to understand not only the amount of the actual construction cost and the loan as the guarantee of the Korea Housing, and there is a collection order for the Defendants’ claims seizure and collection, so it is impossible to confirm the legitimate creditor of the remaining proceeds.”

6) Remaining loans, assignment of claims, etc.

A) The balance of the loan claims against the Plaintiff (Withdrawal)’s private zone housing association calculated at the time of June 24, 2015 is as listed in the following table:

In case non-life insurance, 17,244,738,145, 147, Daegu Bank1,757,757,29,978, 738,517, 339, 11,757,77,757,76,009, the bankruptcy trustee of the Seoul District Bank, Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation, 919,258,666,356,107,777,709, and the bankruptcy trustee of the Seoul District Bank, Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation, 3919,258, 6660, 356, 107,477,477

(unit: Won)

B) Each of the above loan claims of the Plaintiff (Withdrawal) belonged to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff through the following process.

(1) On July 19, 2016, the Plaintiff (Withdrawal) acquired the above loan claims of the K non-life insurance Co., Ltd., Ltd. (Withdrawal) and notified the K non-life insurance association in the private district on July 21, 2016 of the fact that the said assignment of claims was transferred to the K non-life insurance company on the part of the Plaintiff Co., Ltd. (Withdrawal) and to the K non-life insurance association in the private district on July 21, 2016.

(2) On November 4, 2016, the machine acquired the above loan claims of the Daegu Bank, Inc. (Withdrawal). On November 2, 2016, the Intervenor (Withdrawal) succeeded to the said Plaintiff (hereinafter “KM”) acquired the above loan claims again from the machine on November 22, 2016, and notified the private district housing association on December 1, 2016 of the assignment of the said loan claims. MMA lending Food Co., Ltd. acquired the above loan claims from KMM on June 15, 2017, and notified the transfer of the above loan claims on June 16, 2017.

(3) On July 7, 2016, the Intervenor (Withdrawal) succeeded to the Plaintiff’s Federation of the Korea Federation of Community Credit Cooperatives (hereinafter “the Plaintiff”) acquired the above loan claims of the said Plaintiff (Withdrawal) on July 7, 2016. On July 11, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the private district housing association of the fact of transferring the said loan claims.

(4) On May 31, 2016, money acquired the above loan claims of the Plaintiff (Withdrawal) Gavi Capital Co., Ltd., and notified the transfer of the above loan claims to the private district housing association on June 7, 2016.

(5) On November 28, 2016, the machine acquired the above loan claims from the bankruptcy debtor debtor, the bankrupt debtor, the Seoul Mutual Savings Bank, the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation, and notified the private district housing association of the same on December 7, 2016.

(6) On June 15, 2017, the Intervenor succeeded to the Plaintiff acquired all of the above loan claims by entering into a claim trust agreement with the money, Tanos, and MPS subsidiary Co., Ltd. on the same day. On the same day, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor notified the KAD Housing Association of the fact of transferring the claim in question.

C) Meanwhile, the succeeding intervenor of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor also acquired all the claims against the private housing association of the YY and the 2nd Jeju District Housing Association through the following process:

(1) On February 28, 2011, Aju Capital Co., Ltd and Madro Capital Co., Ltd. acquired the loan claims against the private district housing association of the Sodin Savings Bank. On the same day, Aju Capital Co., Ltd. acquired the loan claims against the above association of Korea Savings Bank on the same day. On June 15, 2017, Aju Capital Co., Ltd. acquired the above loan claims and notified the above association of the fact of transferring the loan claims on June 16, 2017.

(2) On June 8, 2016, money acquired a loan claim against the private housing association of the Fair Savings Bank, a company’s private housing association, and notified the said association of the fact of transferring the loan claim on June 9, 2016. On November 28, 2016, the money acquired a loan claim against the above association of the Solomon Savings Bank, and notified the said association of the fact of transferring the loan claim on December 7, 2016.

(3) On June 15, 2017, the Intervenor succeeded to the Plaintiff: (a) concluded a claim trust agreement with YY Co., Ltd.; (b) thereby taking over all of the above loan claims against the YY-dong District Housing Association in YY-gu; and (c) on the same day, the Plaintiff’s successor notified the said Association of the assignment of the above loan claims.

7) Conclusion of mediation of partial deposit money

Of the instant trial proceedings, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s successor and the private district housing association established a mediation that “12,335,730,543 won out of the instant deposit shall be subject to the final judgment between the Plaintiff’s Intervenor’s successor and Defendant Kim Young-young, Park Young-young, and Cho Young-dong District Housing Association,” with respect to KRW 18,50,595,815 won, and KRW 6,167,865,272 shall be confirmed that the Plaintiff’s successor’s successor’s successor’s right to claim payment of each deposit against the private district housing association, and the remaining amount of KRW 1,960,000,000, the amount of KRW

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 6, 11 through 16 (including numbers, if any, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, 3, 4, 25, Eul evidence 8, Eul evidence 4, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the argument in this case before the pleadings in this case

B. Determination

1) According to the above facts, Article 5 (1) of the Convention of this case provides that if the Korea Housing Guarantee has any remaining income, excluding expenses or reserved funds for the completion of the obligation to implement the sale guarantee, it shall be deemed that the Plaintiff, who received a loan corresponding to the first order from the first order of the first order, has the right to take precedence over the Defendants who merely seized and collected the claim of the proceeds of the said association corresponding to the third order of the disposal of the remaining income, as the sum of the balance of the above loan (60,356,107,47 won) of the deposit of this case (60,463,595,47 won) is obviously above the deposit of this case (20,463,5815 won) and the remaining amount of the loan deposit of this case (20,463,595,815 won) is obviously over the repayment of the loan of this case.

2) Therefore, as seen earlier in the underlying facts, the right to claim the payment of the deposit amount of KRW 1,960,000, excluding the remainder of KRW 18,503,595,815, the conciliation was concluded, as seen earlier, shall be deemed to be the Plaintiff. As long as the Defendants are disputing this, the benefit of confirmation shall also be recognized.

2. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge shall transfer interest to a judge.

Judges Kim Yong-tae

Judges Jeon Soo-soo

1) Accordingly, the same mutual savings bank has withdrawn from the lender group.

2) Furthermore, the issue of the heat between the first main body and the second main body was also disappeared by the Plaintiff’s acquisition of all claims by transfer to the Si, the second main body, and the second main body.

3) Even if the result of the instant adjustment is reflected in the foregoing basic facts, the balance of the above loan claims is KRW 48,020,376,934 (i.e., KRW 60,356,107,477 - KRW 12,335,730,543) to be received by the Plaintiff following the adjustment, and the remainder of the deposit is KRW 1,960,00,000, and there is still a significant difference.

4) Meanwhile, the Plaintiff asserts that the attachment and collection order of the Defendants was invalidated pursuant to Article 348(1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act due to the bankruptcy of the private district housing association. However, the purport of the above provision is to interpret that the compulsory execution and preservation order should not be absolutely null and void in all relation between the parties concerned, but rather be relatively null and void only in relation to the bankrupt estate (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da39780, Dec. 22, 2000). Thus, the Plaintiff does not allow the Plaintiff to assert the invalidity of the above attachment and collection order. Even if the Plaintiff asserted it if the appearance of compulsory execution was removed due to the cancellation of the execution of the attachment and collection order by the bankruptcy estate, according to the Plaintiff’s statement under subparagraph 9, the trustee in bankruptcy can only recognize the fact that the Plaintiff applied for the cancellation of the execution against the Defendants’ attachment and collection order, and there is no evidence to acknowledge the actual cancellation of the execution.