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

A. On October 27, 2005, in order to secure the repayment of KRW 150 million, which is equivalent to the Defendant’s investment principal, the Plaintiff created and rendered a second priority collateral security (hereinafter “instant collateral security”) with respect to each real estate listed in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant, with the maximum debt amount of KRW 200 million.

B. On May 19, 2010, upon the Defendant’s application, who is the right to collateral security in the instant case, the decision to commence voluntary auction was rendered to Seosan branch of the Daejeon District Court (hereinafter “instant auction”). The instant real estate was sold in the instant auction procedure, and the ownership transfer registration was completed in the name of each purchaser.

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on the ground that the secured obligation of the instant collateral security was extinguished by Seosan District Court Decision 2010Kadan6538, but on April 12, 2011, the Plaintiff withdrawn the instant lawsuit on the ground that the registration of the establishment of the instant collateral security was already cancelled due to the sale of the instant real estate at the auction procedure, and rendered a ruling of recommending reconciliation with the purport of having no practical benefit in seeking the cancellation thereof. On May 4, 2011, the said ruling of recommending reconciliation became final and conclusive.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff and D conspired to prepare a certificate of assignment of the right to collateral security as if they were transferred from E, the first-class mortgagee of the maximum debt amount of KRW 200 million with respect to the instant real estate, and submitted the certificate of assignment of the right to collateral security at the auction procedure of this case on October 8, 2010, and filed a false application for alteration of the right and demand for distribution.

E. On May 18, 201, Seogu District Court: (a) in the instant auction procedure on May 18, 201, rendered dividends of KRW 22,853,574 to the Defendant of the mortgagee of the instant case as the first priority on the date of distribution; and (b) in the second priority on the second priority on the distribution date of the instant auction procedure.