Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On September 4, 2018, the Plaintiff applied for compulsory auction based on an executory notarial deed against D-owned Busan Shipping Daegu E-based multi-household housing F (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and started the compulsory auction procedure upon receipt of a decision to commence compulsory auction by this court C on September 4, 2018.

B. On June 29, 2017, prior to the commencement of the procedure for compulsory auction, the Defendant issued a decision of provisional seizure with the loan claim amounting to KRW 40,00,000,00 as the loan claim amount prior to the commencement of the procedure for compulsory auction. After the commencement of the procedure for compulsory auction, on May 10, 2018, the Defendant issued a decision of provisional seizure and executed provisional seizure with the amount of claim amounting to KRW 20,50,000.

C. In the above compulsory auction procedure, this court confirmed the amount of KRW 51,075,373, which was calculated by deducting the execution expenses, etc. from the date of distribution implemented on December 11, 2019, as the actual amount to be distributed, and then prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes the amount of KRW 18,575,289 to the Plaintiff and the Defendant 30,244,294 to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and raised an objection against the amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution on December 17, 2019.

[Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy, Entry of Evidence A Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that it is improper for the execution court to distribute dividends to the defendant on the premise that the defendant is the true creditor, even though the defendant in collusion with D as the relative of D and executed provisional seizure based on false claims.

In regard to this, the Defendant is merely in a relationship that he had become aware of in the course of performing his duties with D. At the request of D, the Defendant lent 60,050,000 won in total on six occasions from January 25, 2016 to December 1, 2016. The Defendant’s dividends against the Defendant based on the above loan claim are justified.

B. The burden of proof as to the grounds for objection to a distribution in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is general.