1. A contract establishing a right to collateral security concluded on May 16, 2016 between the Defendant and D regarding the real estate stated in the attached list.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 24, 2016, the Plaintiff received a provisional attachment order with regard to the real estate listed in the attached list D (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the lower court as a preserved right by setting the loan claims of KRW 150,830,743 against D as a preserved right, and the provisional attachment was registered on the same day.

B. D, on May 16, 2016, concluded a mortgage contract with the Defendant, who is a senior ship of a high school, of KRW 25 million with the maximum debt amount, regarding the instant real estate, and completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on May 17, 2016.

(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). C.

Meanwhile, on June 7, 2012, the Plaintiff’s registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (the maximum amount of 68,400,000 won) was completed, but the Plaintiff applied for the auction of real estate E based on the aforementioned collateral security.

On April 25, 2017, the above court prepared a distribution schedule that distributes the amount of KRW 68,400,000 to the Plaintiff, who is the applicant creditor, among the amount of KRW 83,789,09,094 to be actually distributed on the date of distribution, and the Defendant, who is the applicant creditor, each of KRW 15,389,094 (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff reported KRW 101,037,680 as a provisional seizure creditor at the above auction procedure, but failed to receive dividends.

The Plaintiff’s agent F appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and raised an objection against the whole amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on April 27, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that D, whose debts exceeded D, set up the instant collateral security to the defendant, constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, the distribution of dividends to the defendant is unreasonable.

In regard to this, the Defendant had not been in excess of the debt at the time of the establishment of the instant right to collateral security, and the Defendant lent D KRW 20 million to D and had been set up the instant right to collateral security and had been unaware of the debt status.