A. On July 14, 2016, the Plaintiff loaned money to E with respect to the instant apartment as security, and subsequently registered the establishment of the right to collateral security with the maximum amount of KRW 219.7 million and KRW 78 million on July 14, 2016.

E delayed the payment of the principal and interest of the loan to the Plaintiff from September 2018, and on March 15, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction of real estate (hereinafter “instant auction”) with the court F on the basis of the registration of the establishment of the above collateral security (hereinafter “instant auction”).

B. On March 24, 2020, in the instant auction case, Defendant C received dividends of KRW 20 million and KRW 12 million in the order of priority among the small lessees of the instant apartment in the instant auction, and the Plaintiff was in the second priority order and was in the form of a collective security interest of KRW 195,580,047.

At the time, the amount of claims against the plaintiff E was approximately KRW 247,185,850.

[Ground of recognition] Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

A. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s assertion is either the most lessee who concluded a false rental agreement in collusion with E on the instant real estate, or the lease agreement entered into between the Defendants and E ought to be revoked as an intentional act.

Therefore, all dividends that the Defendants received should be distributed to the Plaintiff.

B. On March 10, 2015, the Defendant asserted that Defendant C concluded a lease agreement with a deposit of KRW 30 million as to the room 1 partitions among the apartment buildings in this case.

At the time of the lease agreement, the defendant paid 10 million won out of the deposit to E, and the remaining 20 million won was paid in installments by November 6, 2015.

(c)

On September 5, 2018, the defendant entered into a lease agreement with E by setting the deposit amount of KRW 12 million on the apartment of this case between E and the defendant's introduction of Defendant D's real estate brokerage business.

The defendant paid the deposit in cash to E.

3. Determination

(a) is deemed to have satisfied the external requirements such as the genuine lessee;

(b)if any;