1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On June 29, 2010, E completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “the instant real estate”). On November 9, 2012, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the said real estate, including E and E, the maximum debt amount of KRW 117 million (hereinafter “the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage”).

B. The Plaintiff, a creditor, filed an application for a compulsory auction of real estate with Daejeon District Court C. On October 21, 2015, the executing court distributes 30,045,643 won to the Defendant, a mortgagee, who is the right to collateral security, in the fourth order of the amount to be actually distributed after deducting the execution cost from the proceeds of sale of the real estate in this case. The Plaintiff was excluded from

C. On October 21, 2015, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the total amount of the Defendant’s dividends on the date of distribution.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and determination as to the cause of claim

A. Since the registration of the establishment of a mortgage near the Plaintiff’s assertion that the establishment of a mortgage in the instant case did not exist, it is unlawful for an auction court to pay dividends to the Defendant by deeming the Defendant as a collateral security holder inasmuch as the establishment of a mortgage in

B. In light of the following circumstances, it is not sufficient to recognize that the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case was a registration invalidation of cause for which the secured debt of this case does not exist, solely on the basis of the statement Nos. 5 through 8, which is acknowledged by comprehensively considering the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement Nos. 1 and 3 as to each of the statements

(1) From January 3, 2011 to January 12, 2012, the Defendant asserted that he lent KRW 90 million in total to E with the operating capital in the case of a bank from January 3, 2011 to January 12, 201. However, the Defendant submitted financial data that can support his claim, such as the details of the withdrawal of deposits, and that E deposited KRW 60-1.8 million each month by stating “G stores” and “G stores shares” from February 3, 2011 to May 2013.