beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Claims concerning the cause of claims;
A. On May 24, 2006 and October 30, 2006, Nonparty G lent a total of KRW 200 million to Nonparty B, each of which was KRW 100 million. On September 30, 201, Nonparty B sold H land and a building on the ground, which is one’s own ownership, to Nonparty I for KRW 1.6 billion and transferred the remainder claim KRW 283 million to the said G on October 28, 201.
B. On February 2012, the above G did not perform the obligation of the above transfer money, and conducted a provisional attachment on the instant real estate owned by it. On October 17, 2012, the said G had obtained a decision to commence compulsory auction (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) with the Changwon District Court Jinju Branch C (D, E, and F) (D, E, and F) (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).
C. On September 10, 2013, the Plaintiff acquired the dividend claim to be received by G during the above auction procedure from the above G to the said G, and the transferor notified the said G of the transfer to the said I. D.
On the other hand, on October 27, 2011, the above I set up a right to collateral security of KRW 100 million on the instant real estate owned by the Defendant (B prior to the transfer, CoB Partners, Ltd.) for the purpose of KRW 100 million borrowed from the Defendant.
E. The Defendant, based on the right to collateral security established as above, received dividends of KRW 90,40,240 on the date of distribution of the instant auction procedure. The Plaintiff prepared a distribution schedule with the content that the Plaintiff received dividends of KRW 15,818,648 as subordinate creditors. On October 21, 2013, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the total amount of the Defendant’s dividends, and filed the instant lawsuit on October 28, 2013.
F. The above I set up a collateral on B with the Defendant (BBS Co., Ltd. prior to the transfer) for the foregoing insolvency in which any property other than the instant real estate was not owned. This should be revoked as a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, a creditor, and the said distribution schedule deleted the amount of dividends to the Defendant and its equivalent amount.