A. The Plaintiff acquired and succeeded to the status of the Bank’s claim for provisional attachment of KRW 57,158,525 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) against the 20th floor of Songpa-gu Seoul Building No. 102-2004 (hereinafter “instant real estate”), which was owned by C, the sale object of the instant court B real estate auction (hereinafter “instant auction”), and completed the registration of establishment of mortgage over the instant real estate as Seoul East Eastern District Court No. 848809, Nov. 18, 2013, as Seoul Eastern District Court No. 84809, the Defendant and the maximum debt amount of KRW 200,000 (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). B.

On December 9, 2014, the Defendant completed the transfer registration of collateral security based on the transfer of credit from E as of December 9, 2014, and reported to the auction of this case that he succeeded to the status of creditor. The transfer contract between the Defendant and E attached to the transfer registration report is indicated as KRW 200,000 on April 25, 200.

C. On March 6, 2015, the instant court drafted a distribution schedule that distributes each of the amount of KRW 3,456,140 to the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, a tax payer, among KRW 1,194,383,137, the amount to be actually distributed on the date of distribution of the instant auction; KRW 345,757,319 to the successor-based limited liability company of the Nonghyup Bank, a creditor applying for senior mortgagee and the creditor applying for senior mortgagee; KRW 670,000 to F, a lessee of the fixed date, and KRW 175,169,678 to the Defendant, a junior mortgagee, who is the junior mortgagee, who is the junior mortgagee.

On the date of the above distribution, the Plaintiff stated an objection to the whole amount of KRW 175,169,678 of the dividend amount of the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted and determined that the instant right to collateral security exists only in the registration of the establishment thereof, but does not exist any secured claim, and thus, the distribution of dividends to the Defendant is unreasonable.