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

A. As to each real estate listed in the separate list, the Jeonju District Court 2005,00,000 won (the maximum debt amount of No. 375,00,000,000, the debtor, the debtor, the mortgagee C (the defendant), E, and F, had completed the registration of creation of a mortgage, and thereafter, the shares of Defendant C and F among the above collateral security was transferred to E as of August 18, 2009 by the receipt of No. 21594 on August 18, 2009.

Since then on March 8, 2010, the same registry office received No. 3740 on March 8, 2010, Defendant B completed the respective registration of pledge in relation to KRW 225,00,000, and Defendant C completed the respective registration of pledge in relation to KRW 150,000.

B. Of KRW 670,90,231, the amount to be actually distributed to Defendant B, the mortgagee of the pledge right, and KRW 150,000,00,00, out of KRW 670,90,231, the amount to be actually distributed to the Plaintiff, the debtor and the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet, was distributed to Defendant C, the creditor of the second priority, and KRW 52,317,286, the amount to be distributed to the Plaintiff, the debtor and the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

C. On January 8, 2014, the Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution of the instant voluntary auction, and raised an objection against the Defendants regarding the total amount of dividends, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on January 13, 2014, within one week thereafter.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On May 2, 2006, the Plaintiff asserted that the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage was null and void shall be subject to G, since the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 250,000,000 from G and offered each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet as security. As such, the first priority collective security holder of the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage, which was completed on each of the above real estates, should be G.

Nevertheless, since the registration of establishment of mortgage was completed with Defendant C, E, and F as collateral, it is invalid against the subsidiary nature of the security right.

However, in the procedure of voluntary auction of this case, it is above.