(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2019.07.12 2018가합101522

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) 대전지방법원천안지원 2019.07.12 2018가합101522

부당이득금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Industrial Bank of Korea (hereinafter “C”) shall proceed with the instant auction procedure.

2) Each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet No. 1 owned (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”)

2) On November 2, 2016, the decision to commence compulsory auction was made on November 2, 2016 and the decision to commence voluntary auction procedure was conducted on January 26, 2017 with respect to each of the instant real estate and the instant machinery and instruments.

3) In the instant auction procedure, only machines and apparatus Nos. 1, 2, and 6 were subject to auction on the ground that the location of machines and apparatus Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 7 from among the machines and apparatus listed in the separate sheet Nos. 2 in the separate sheet No. 3, 4, 5, and 7 was unknown (hereinafter “the instant auction procedure”).

(B) The instant real estate and machinery and apparatus for auction purposes were determined to be sold en bloc. The total amount of the appraised value is KRW 1,956,504,00, and the appraised value of the machinery and apparatus for auction purposes is KRW 353,536,00. (B) The Plaintiff received the decision to permit the sale of each of the instant real estate and machinery and apparatus for auction purposes on December 11, 2017, and paid the total of KRW 1,302,00,000 for sale on January 12, 2018.

2) On February 7, 2018, the Defendant acquired the claim for the cause of the right to collateral security against C from the Industrial Bank of Korea, and received dividends of KRW 1,258,605,084 as an applicant-based creditor and mortgagee at the instant auction procedure. (c) F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) (hereinafter “F”) concluded against G and C on November 16, 2016, that “G and C” used the same machinery and appliances as indicated below (hereinafter “lease machinery and appliances”) in accordance with the lease agreement. However, on the ground that the lease agreement was terminated, G and C did not pay the lease fee, the right to claim the return based on ownership was revoked.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2015.07.15 2014가합56962

-부산고등법원(창원) 2014.12.11 2014나1051

-대전지방법원논산지원 2020.05.28 2019가단21463

-광주지방법원 2017.09.22 2016가합59404

-전주지방법원군산지원 2020.06.11 2019가합50569