(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

(b) Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Requesting the defendant bank;

A. Basic facts based on D: (a) in the case of Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch C or F (Duplicate) for compulsory auction of real estate, the amount of KRW 214,680,315, which is to be actually distributed on August 8, 2017, is set up in the distribution schedule with the Defendant B, the applicant creditor, in the order of KRW 14,975,424, and KRW 1475,424, and KRW 1,518,480, and KRW 480, and KRW 207,78,50,50, and KRW 47,761,947, and KRW 947, to the Defendant Bank, the applicant creditor, in the order of 144,975,424, and the second order, to non-resident agricultural cooperatives, the applicant creditor.

Accordingly, on August 8, 2017, the Plaintiff raised an objection against KRW 11,838,662 out of the dividend amount against Defendant B on the date of distribution, respectively, against KRW 28,161,338 out of the dividend amount against Defendant Bank.

【Ground of recognition】 Evidence Nos. 1-2, 3, 4, and 7; the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The Plaintiff asserted and decided 1) The Plaintiff: (a) upon D’s recommendation, the Plaintiff moved into the instant apartment on June 27, 2002 by verbal lease of the lease deposit amounting to KRW 40 million; and (b) on September 5, 2008, after moving into the instant apartment on September 5, 2008, the Plaintiff had been registered and resided in the instant apartment until now, except for the period of approximately one-month transfer from around 1 month to around 2007.

After doing so, on October 10, 2016, the distribution schedule should be revised to distribute 40 million won out of the amount distributed to the Defendants, a junior creditor, to the Plaintiff in proportion to the amount of the claim, on October 11, 2016, after preparing D and lease agreement with the knowledge that the provisional attachment registration has been completed on the apartment of this case. After obtaining the fixed date on October 11, 2016, the distribution schedule should be revised.

B) Defendant Bank: The Plaintiff is the most lessee, and the former distribution schedule is justifiable. 2).