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

A. On August 26, 2014, on the motion of the Defendant, the mortgagee, the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with respect to D, 106, 205, 205 (hereinafter “instant real estate”), which was owned by C, the procedure for the auction of real estate (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) was initiated on August 26, 2014.

B. In the instant auction procedure, the said executing court determined and publicly announced the completion date for the demand for distribution on November 17, 2014.

C. On February 5, 2015, the Plaintiff submitted to the said executing court an application for the report of rights and the demand for distribution.

On July 16, 2015, the court of execution prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that distributes the amount of KRW 102,671,595 to the Defendant, who is a mortgagee, on the date of distribution.

E. The Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and raised an objection against KRW 14,00,00 among the dividend distributed to the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on July 23, 2015, within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1 and purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract with C, the owner of the instant real estate, with a deposit of KRW 40,000,000 (hereinafter “lease”). The Plaintiff received the instant real estate and received the fixed date while living in the Republic of Korea, and also received the move-in report.

On September 25, 2014, the Plaintiff sent a report on the right to the deposit of the instant lease and an application for the demand for distribution against the office of the Youngcheon District Court Young-gu branch enforcement officer, and around that time, the said report on the said right and the application for the demand for distribution was served at the said enforcement office.

Therefore, the instant dividend table that did not distribute to the Plaintiff, which is recognized as the top priority repayment right, should be corrected as it is unlawful.

3. The standing to sue that can file a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is limited to the creditor or the debtor who has raised an objection as to the distribution schedule by attending on the date of distribution.