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

A. On October 21, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage over the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by C (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with respect to the real estate (hereinafter “instant apartment”), the maximum debt amount of KRW 17.9 million, and C, the debtor.

Based on the foregoing right to collateral security, the Plaintiff filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate with the Incheon District Court B, and the above court rendered a voluntary decision to commence the auction on December 7, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant auction procedure”). B.

On January 15, 2015, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement between C and C with respect to the instant apartment (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the term of KRW 27 million and the term of lease from March 3, 2015 to March 2, 2017.

C. On the date of distribution implemented on December 15, 2016 regarding the instant auction procedure, the said court prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that distributes KRW 27 million to the Defendant, who demanded a distribution as a small lessee among KRW 81,604,605, the amount to be actually distributed to the applicant creditor and the applicant creditor, in the order of priority 46,186,385, respectively.

On the date of the above distribution, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the amount of KRW 27 million against the Defendant, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on December 20, 2016, which was within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 8, and 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the plaintiff's assertion is the most lessee, and the lease contract of this case is based on the false representation of the defendant's conspiracy with C.

Therefore, the distribution schedule of this case should be revised to distribute to the Plaintiff the dividend amount of KRW 27 million against the Defendant, such as the purport of the claim.

B. (1) In full view of the purport of each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5 through 7, 9, and Eul evidence Nos. 4-1 and 2, Eul purchased the apartment of this case at KRW 77 million on January 18, 2014, and 1-A.

shall be subject to the establishment of the right to collateral security.