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

A. At Jeju, the instant auction procedure commenced with respect to No. 214, 103, 214, 103 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) upon filing an application for voluntary auction with the Jeju Bank, etc., and the instant real estate was sold to F and G on December 1, 2015 from the said auction procedure, and the said auction court, out of KRW 428,810,409, the amount to be distributed to F and G on December 24, 2015, 124,230,365, among the amount to be distributed to the Defendant on December 24, 2015, the Defendant, as the owner of the land concurrently holding the office of the debtor and KRW 0,00,00,

B. The Plaintiff raised an objection to the amount distributed by the Defendant, and on December 28, 2015, filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution of the instant case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and one of the co-owners of the real estate of this case for which the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings was made. The auction court of this case is the mortgagee of H, one of the co-owners of the real estate of this case for which the auction of this case was conducted. The auction court of this case should make additional dividends from the auction price of H's co-ownership owned by the surety, the surety's property of this case, only if there is a shortage after paying dividends only to the auction price of the defendant's share among the real estate of this case. However, the

Since the plaintiff's assertion that the right to collateral security is null and void in accordance with the contract to establish the right to collateral security, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

The defendant's judgment on this safety defense is invalid since the plaintiff's right to collateral security is null and void, and the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is deemed unlawful. Thus, the plaintiff's right to sue to bring a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution is acknowledged, even if the plaintiff appeared in the auction procedure of this case and raised an objection on the date of distribution, as long as the plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection on the distribution schedule of this case, the validity of the claim on the merits can be determined depending on the existence of the claim.