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

A. The instant real estate was sold in the Incheon District Court C real estate auction case regarding the Jung-gu Incheon Jung-gu E Apartment F (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by D.

On April 28, 2017, the court of execution prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter referred to as “instant distribution schedule”) in order of 164,030,715 won to be distributed among the proceeds from sale on the date of distribution, which was conducted on April 28, 2017, to the Defendant, a lessee of small claims, 25,00,000 won, and 131,00,000 won to the G Union, a mortgagee of a right to collateral security, and 3rd priority to distribute each of the KRW 8,030,715 to the applicant creditor H (the mortgagee of small claims) (hereinafter referred to as the “mortgage”).

B. On May 30, 2014, the Plaintiff, who was a subordinate mortgagee, was established with a maximum debt amount of KRW 28.6 million on the instant real estate in order to secure the lending of KRW 22 million to D on May 30, 2014.

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and made an objection against KRW 5,630,715 out of the amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on May 2, 2017, which was seven days thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument

2. Assertion and determination

A. 1) The contract concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant with respect to the instant real estate is null and void as it was concluded with a third party, not D, or null and void as a conspiracy. In addition, since the Defendant did not have received the instant real estate from the beginning of the year of delivery, and the possession was commenced only after the completion date of the distribution date ( July 1, 2016), the amount calculated by subtracting KRW 5,630,715,250,000, from the dividends distributed to the Defendant as a small lessee of the instant real estate, H, who was a senior mortgagee, from KRW 19,369,285, which was present and stated an objection on the date of distribution, from the dividends distributed to the Defendant as a small lessee of the instant real estate, the instant distribution schedule should be corrected by removing the said amount and distributing the said amount to the Plaintiff. 2) The instant lease agreement between the Defendant and D is valid, and the Defendant is a small lessee with opposing power.

(b).