2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. The Defendant, as a creditor who created a right to collateral security of KRW 644,800,000 on September 24, 2009 with respect to E Apartment 101, Dong 610 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”), owned D, filed an application for an auction of real estate with this court C, and received a decision to commence the auction of real estate on January 28, 2013.

B. On November 27, 2013, the auction court distributed KRW 1,016,740 in the order of first priority in Nowon-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City for KRW 407,925,093, and distributed KRW 406,908,353 in the order of second priority to the Defendant.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs raised an objection against the Defendant’s dividend amount on the date of distribution, and filed the instant lawsuit on December 4, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs asserted that they obtained a fixed date after entering into each lease agreement with D on April 27, 2012 and May 11, 2012, and paid 25 million won for each lease deposit. The plaintiffs have the right to receive a preferential repayment payment as a small lessee.

3. Determination

A. A lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is sought for the modification of a distribution schedule or the preparation of a new distribution schedule in order to reduce the amount distributed to himself/herself by reducing the amount distributed to a person entered in the distribution schedule. Thus, the plaintiff is not sufficient to assert and prove that there is no claim of the defendant in order for the plaintiff to win the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, and the plaintiff is entitled to receive dividends from the defendant. The defendant did not raise an objection against the plaintiff on the date of distribution.

Even if the plaintiff's claim can be rejected, the existence of the plaintiff's claim itself can be denied.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da42259 Decided July 12, 2012). B.

First of all, according to the records of evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 with respect to Plaintiff A, and evidence Nos. 5 with respect to Plaintiff A, Plaintiff A was 2.4 on April 27, 2012.