beta
Text
1. On February 21, 2019, the distribution schedule prepared by the above court in the Incheon District Court Vice-Support E and F (Dual) cases.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On August 6, 2015, G created the first priority collective security right with respect to H apartment I (hereinafter “instant apartment”), which is its owner, as the maximum debt amount of KRW 235,200,000, and as the creditor of the collective security interestsJ, the first priority collective security right was established. On July 25, 2016, G created the second priority collective security right with the maximum debt amount of KRW 84,00,000, and the debtor K and the creditor of the collective security interest as the plaintiff.
B. L Co., Ltd., a creditor of G, filed an application for the commencement of compulsory auction with respect to the apartment of this case, and the compulsory auction was commenced on March 30, 2018 (this court E), and the Plaintiff also filed an application for the commencement of voluntary auction on June 26, 2018.
[F. (F.C. On August 10, 2018, the Defendant paid for the secured debt of the first priority mortgage and completed the supplementary registration for the transfer of the right to collateral. On the same day, M.A. In the above auction procedure, the apartment of this case was adjudicated on January 7, 2019, and on February 21, 2019, the apartment of this case was adjudicated at the auction procedure, and on February 21, 2019, 169, 169,232,485 won to M.A., the transferor of the first priority mortgage claim, and 44,769,25 won: 214,01,740 won - 169,232,485 won - 162,485 won, and 233,2860 won, and 201 to the Defendant, the Defendant, who is the first priority mortgagee, had no ground for pleading as to the dividends of this case.
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant’s promise with G (No. 8-1, hereinafter “this case’s promise”)
A claim for distribution was made on the basis of G seal, and the instant promise is null and void as it used G seal or made by the Defendant make use of G’s old-path state.
Therefore, the defendant is entitled to collateral security of this case.