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

A. On August 30, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “instant collective security”) with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by C (hereinafter “instant apartment”). The Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “instant collective security”) with the maximum debt amount of KRW 87,100,000, and the debtor C, the mortgagee, the mortgagee of the collective security (hereinafter “instant collective security”).

B. On the basis of the instant right to collateral security, the Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction of the instant apartment based on the instant right to collateral security, and on December 3, 2013, the procedure of voluntary auction was initiated with the District Court B.

(hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).

C. In the instant auction procedure, in order to September 24, 2014, the appellate court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes KRW 14 million to the Defendant, who is the lessee of the instant apartment to the small amount regarding the instant apartment, and, in the fourth order, distributes KRW 50,668,709 to the Plaintiff, who is the obligee pursuant to the instant collective security (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and raised an objection against the amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution on September 29, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 3, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the most lessee who entered into a false rental agreement on the apartment of this case in order to receive the distribution of small amount lease deposit.

B. In a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, the Plaintiff shall assert and prove facts constituting the grounds for objection against distribution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da32178, Nov. 14, 1997). In the event that the Plaintiff claims that his/her claim has been established, the Plaintiff is liable to prove the facts constituting the grounds for the occurrence of the claim, and where the Defendant claims that his/her claim has been invalidated as a false declaration of conspiracy or extinguished as a result of repayment, the Defendant is liable to prove

Supreme Court Decision 200