beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's respective claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The deceased on June 4, 2016, was the owner of an underground floor G for multi-household housing (hereinafter “instant real estate”). On July 8, 2010, the network set up a mortgage worth KRW 72 million with the maximum debt amount, in order to guarantee the debt to H’s I against water.
B. On April 24, 2017, there was a decision to commence voluntary auction based on the aforementioned right to collateral security (D) and registered on April 25, 2017, and the Defendants reported a right as a small lessee and demanded a distribution as follows in the said voluntary auction case.
1) On March 2, 2017, the date of Defendant B contract, the lessor E (owner) and the lessee B’s lease period from March 2, 2017 to March 1, 2019, the lease deposit of KRW 17 million among the instant real estate was concluded by Defendant B and Network E’s agent J on March 17, 2017, the date of the move-in report on March 2, 2017, the date of the move-in report on March 2, 2017, the date of the move-in report on March 2, 2017, the lease was concluded on May 30, 2012, and the lessee’s lease deposit of KRW 17 million from March 2, 2017 to March 1, 2019 (the owner) and the lessee’s lease of KRW 30,500,000,000 for five (6) years from May 30, 2012 to May 29,
According to the distribution schedule prepared by this court on January 11, 2018, the Defendants received 14,000,000 won, respectively, as a small lessee with the highest priority repayment right, and the Plaintiff received 32,641,184 won, as a transferee of the right to collateral security from I, in the lower order.
The Plaintiff raised an objection to the total amount of dividends paid by the Defendants.
[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, and 8 (if there are virtual numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)
2. Determination:
A. The gist of the parties’ assertion is that the Defendants are the most lessee who entered into a false rental agreement without the purpose of using and earning profit from the leased object.