beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' lawsuits of this case are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. The plaintiffs' assertion
A. On October 23, 2007, F prepared and delivered a notarial deed of debt repayment contract No. 1908 of 2007, No. 1908 in G, a notary public who is obligated to pay KRW 270,000,000 to Plaintiff A by October 31, 1999, and on May 28, 2007, a notary public who is obligated to pay KRW 700,000 to Plaintiff B by May 15, 2007, prepared and delivered a notarial deed of debt repayment contract No. 968 of 207, No. 2007.
B. On June 21, 2018 and July 17, 2018, the Defendants received the F’s claim for the preservation of election expenses against the Republic of Korea under the Daegu District Court Decision 2018TG Kimcheon-gu 2220 and 2018TT 2542, respectively. The said decision became final and conclusive around that time.
C. On August 10, 2018, Korea deposited KRW 22,496,520 as the compensation for election expenses No. 668, pursuant to Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act, on the ground that there exists competition with claims such as seizure and collection order, etc. on August 10, 2018.
As a result, in the Daegu District Court Kimcheon Branch E-distribution of the said deposit, the Defendants received dividends of KRW 12,954,403 and KRW 9,524,914 in proportion to the amount of the claim as the collection right holder, respectively, and the Plaintiffs prepared a distribution schedule to the effect that they did not receive any distribution at all.
E. However, the Plaintiffs demanded the distribution of dividends to the Republic of Korea on August 6, 2018. Nevertheless, it is unreasonable to exclude the Plaintiffs from the distribution of dividends.
Therefore, the above distribution schedule should be revised to KRW 5,198,286 as dividends against Defendant C Co., Ltd.; KRW 9,524,914 as dividends against Defendant C Co., Ltd.; KRW 3,822,116 as dividends; KRW 7,294,173 as dividends against Plaintiff C; KRW 0 as dividends against Plaintiff C, KRW 6,164,740 as dividends.
2. A lawsuit of demurrer against a distribution, which is the creditor who first raised a demand by the plaintiffs, is lawful.