logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원평택지원 2016.07.21 2016가단122
배당이의
Text

1. A dividend table prepared by the said court on December 29, 2015 with respect to the distribution procedures B of Suwon District Court Pyeongtaek District Court.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 27, 2015, the Defendant: (a) received a provisional attachment order on the service payment claim held by Suwon District Court Decision 2015Kadan97, which was KRW 28,280,400, with the claim claim amounting to KRW 28,280,40; and (b) on March 4, 2015, the said provisional attachment order was served on the Iljin Pluc Corporation.

B. Native Technology Co., Ltd. received a claim for KRW 150,000,000 against C as a claim claim amounting to KRW 2015,000,000 for the service payment claim held by Suwon District Court at KRW 2015,09,934, with respect to the service payment claim that C holds against the corporation, and this was served on Jinsp Co., Ltd. on February 17, 2015.

C. The claim amounting to KRW 65,259,818 against C is the claim amounting to KRW 65,259,818, and the claim amounting to KRW 2015Kadan339, Suwon District Court rendered provisional attachment of the claim amounting to the service payment claim held by C against Jindow Co., Ltd. on March 3, 2015.

In the distribution procedure indicated in the order that had been conducted with the deposit of KRW 26,638,416 of the service payment debt of KRW 26,615-2057, the distribution court prepared a distribution schedule to preferentially distribute the amount of KRW 26,612,269 to the defendant in the capacity of wage creditors as wages creditors on December 29, 2015, and the plaintiffs raised an objection against it on the date of distribution and filed the lawsuit of this case within a week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Gap's evidence Nos. 4, 5, Gap's evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiffs' assertion is not a wage creditor for C, but a claim for the agreed amount against D, the representative director of C, a stock company.

arrow