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

A. On March 22, 2017, the Plaintiff drafted a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement with E.

The notarial deed provides that the Plaintiff shall lend 20,000,000 won to E on April 3, 2017 as interest rate of 25% per annum; E shall be repaid to the Plaintiff in installments each month from May 3, 2017 to December 3, 2018; however, even once after delay in the payment of principal or interest, it shall lose the benefit of time and recognize that there is no objection even if compulsory execution is immediately conducted.

B. On March 11, 2017, E completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on the F building G (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City F building G (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on March 11, 2017.

C. H completed the registration of the decision to commence compulsory auction on May 22, 2017, regarding the instant real estate.

Then, on June 9, 2017, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the compulsory auction decision to the Incheon District Court I on the instant real estate.

On May 3, 2018, at the above auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”), the instant dividend table was prepared to distribute KRW 32,000,000 to the Defendant and KRW 56,477 to the Plaintiff.

On the date of the above distribution, the plaintiff raised an objection against the total amount of the defendant's dividends, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution of this case within seven days thereafter.

[Based on recognition] Each entry of Gap 1-4 evidence (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the secured claim of the right to collateral security of this case is suspected as false claims, and that the Incheon Credit Guarantee Foundation, the provisional seizure right holder of the real estate of this case, won in the lawsuit of revocation of fraudulent act and the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution against the defendant, the plaintiff is entitled to receive dividends in proportion to the amount, and therefore, the judgment of this case should be sentenced.

(e).