1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The Seoul Northern District Court's distribution procedure case is the same.

Basic Facts

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: “The court reported the reason for the deposit of the obligation to the executing court pursuant to Article 248(4) of the Civil Execution Act on April 4, 2013,” which read “the deposit officer reported the reason for the deposit of the obligation to the executing court ex officio on April 4, 2013, and reported the reason for the deposit of the obligation to the executing court.” The deposit officer reported the entire amount of the Defendant’s dividends from 5 pages to 2-1, “the total amount of the Defendant’s dividends” as “the amount of the Defendant’s dividends corresponding to the corrected amount of the primary claim,” respectively, is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance court, and thus, it is cited as it is in accordance

Plaintiff’s assertion

J, inasmuch as the Plaintiff legitimately exercised the right of subrogation as the right of subrogation as a mortgagee was subject to the decision of provisional seizure by cancelling the registration of establishment of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage in the Plaintiff’s name without any cause, the Plaintiff shall be entitled to receive the dividends of deposit money from the Defendants, who are general creditors. Therefore, the instant distribution schedule should be revised as stated in

Even if the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to exercise the right of subrogation as a collateral security holder, the claim under the authentic copy of the protocol of conciliation in the case No. 2009Gahap92 against Cheongju District Court Decision 2009Gahap92 against Cheongju District Court against J is limited to ① a simultaneous performance condition that Defendant B would cancel the right of collateral security in the name of PJ 91m2 and Q Qua established on the ground of the building in Ycheon-si PP in Ycheon-si, but the above condition has not been fulfilled or the above condition has already been fully satisfied or ② the distribution schedule in this case should be corrected to delete the distribution amount against

However, it is stipulated that the proviso of Article 370 and Article 342 of the Civil Code should be attached before the payment or delivery of money or other things which the mortgagee is entitled to receive in order to exercise the subrogation right.