(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.12.24 2019가단521026

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) 광주지방법원 2019.12.24 2019가단521026

배당이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 27, 2017, the Defendant: (a) filed a move-in report on the land-based building owned by Nonparty F in Gwangju Northern-gu (hereinafter “instant building”); and (b) obtained a fixed date on February 20, 2018, on the lease agreement under which FF leased the instant house to the Defendant.

B. In the procedure of compulsory auction conducted in relation to the instant house as a real estate auction case, the Gwangju District Court D (E) distributed KRW 19,488,855 to the Defendant reported as a small lessee on June 27, 2019, and prepared a distribution schedule that did not distribute to the Plaintiff as a creditor.

C. The Plaintiff stated an objection against the amount of distribution to the Defendant on the date of distribution of the said real estate auction case, and filed a lawsuit of this case seeking rectification of the distribution schedule within seven days from the date of distribution.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 evidence, Eul 1 and 3 evidence, the whole purport of the pleading

2. Summary and determination of the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that the amount of dividends against the defendant should be deleted and that the amount of dividends should be corrected to be distributed to the plaintiff in full to the plaintiff, since the plaintiff was the most lessee who obtained the fixed date by making a false move-in report even though the defendant had actually entered into a lease contract on the housing of this case and had not resided in the housing of this case.

B. According to the overall purport of the statement and pleading in Eul evidence No. 1, the defendant can acknowledge the fact that the contract of leasing the house of this case was concluded between F and F on August 26, 2017. Thus, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the above lease contract is a false declaration of conspiracy.

Rather, according to the statement of evidence Nos. 2 through 6 (including the number of branch numbers), the Defendant can only recognize the fact that the Defendant leased the instant house from F around August 26, 2017 to reside in the said real estate from around that time.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.18 2015가합543288

-서울남부지방법원 2019.03.28 2018가단15615

-인천지방법원 2015.04.14 2014가단229879

-수원지방법원안산지원 2015.06.12 2015가단100822

-대법원 2014. 2. 27. 선고 2012다93794 판결