beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant filed an application with Nonparty D for a payment order claiming payment of loans of KRW 22,800,000 and damages for delay thereof with the Seoul District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch of the above court on January 15, 2016 (hereinafter “instant payment order”). On January 20, 2016, the said payment order was served on D and became final and conclusive on February 4, 2016.
B. E, the debtor of D, deposited the repayment of KRW 15 million with Jeonju District Court 2016No. 375,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 was issued by the Defendant around June 2016, as the original copy of the instant payment order was based on the original copy of the instant payment order and issued a collection order as to the above deposit under the Act No. 2016,5187
C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff also issued a collection order for the claim against D as the claim amount. The former District Court rendered the order of seizure and collection for the claim against the said deposit under the Act No. 2017TTT 524.
Accordingly, on July 17, 2017, the distribution schedule was prepared to distribute the dividend amount of KRW 9,309,169 to the Defendant and KRW 5,689,533 to the Plaintiff, respectively, (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion
A. The instant payment order is invalid as it is deemed that D applied for the fraudulent use of the Defendant’s name for the purpose of acquiring the said deposit money.
Therefore, since the defendant is not a legitimate collection authority, the amount of dividends to the defendant among the distribution schedule of this case should be deleted, and the distribution schedule of this case should be corrected to the effect that the whole amount of the above dividends is distributed to the plaintiff.
B. Even if the instant payment order is valid, the Defendant is not a member of the successful bid bid that D operated, but only a loan claim of KRW 8 million against D.