A. As to C, the Plaintiff is a creditor who holds a claim based on a payment order finalized by the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2010 Ghana5193864, and the court’s decision on performance recommendation for acquisition money.

B. On November 30, 1995, D created a right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) consisting of 1/2 of C’s share among E, 896§³ (hereinafter “instant real property”). The F completed the registration of transfer of the instant right to collateral security from D on October 21, 2004, and the Defendant completed the registration of transfer from F on January 22, 2015.

C. On April 15, 2015, as Jeju District Court B, on April 15, 2015, a voluntary auction procedure for 1/2 of C’s equity interest in the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) was commenced.

The Plaintiff demanded each distribution of the principal and interest of the claim based on the final and conclusive payment order of the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2010Da5193864 won, 72,622,864 won, and 38,012,284 won based on the final and conclusive payment order of the acquisition money case of the Seoul Central District Court Decision 201Da78931.

E. On January 22, 2016, the Jeju District Court distributed dividends of KRW 24,343,589 and KRW 12,741,930 to the Plaintiff, who is the person having the right to demand a distribution, respectively. The Jeju District Court prepared a distribution schedule stating that the Defendant, who is the right to demand a distribution, distributes the amount of KRW 50 million to the Defendant, who is the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”). The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer to the distribution of the Defendant’s entire dividends on January 28, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the Plaintiff’s assertion is merely a type completed by C in order to evade compulsory execution, and there is no legal act establishing the secured claim. Therefore, the cause is null and void.

This case.