1. Of the distribution schedule prepared by the above court on May 17, 2017, the Busan District Court C real estate compulsory auction application case.

1. Facts recognized;

A. On July 27, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for a compulsory auction of real estate (hereinafter “instant auction”) with the Busan District Court C on July 27, 2016 on the “Yasan-gu Busan District E apartment F (hereinafter “instant apartment”) owned by D, and accordingly, on July 28, 2016, the entry of the decision on compulsory auction of the instant apartment was completed.

B. In the instant auction procedure, the Defendant asserted that he leased two rooms from D to KRW 80,00 from April 20, 2015 and occupied them from April 20, 2015, and was the lessee who received the move-in report and the fixed date as of July 11, 2016, and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution.

C. In allocating the amount of KRW 204,036,453 to be actually distributed by opening a date of distribution on May 17, 2017, the said auction court distributed KRW 123,514,531 in the order of first priority to the G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G Ggs, and subsequently, by recognizing the defendant as a lessee with a fixed date, distributes KRW 80,000 in the order of second priority, and finally, prepares a distribution schedule with the content that distributes KRW 521,922 in the order of third priority to the plaintiff who is the applicant creditor.

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of the above distribution, and raised an objection against the full amount of the dividend to the Defendant, and then filed the instant lawsuit within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-4, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1-3 (including above numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the above dividend is unfair since the defendant is the most lessee, and the defendant asserts that he is the genuine lessee with the right to refund the lease deposit amount of KRW 80 million.

B. In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of each of the evidence mentioned above, Gap evidence Nos. 5-8, Eul evidence Nos. 7-9, Eul evidence Nos. 12 and 13, and the overall purport of the pleadings, the defendant is deemed the most lessee.

(1) The defendant shall Doz.