1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. As to E’s share (hereinafter “instant real estate”) among the 105 square meters in the 105 square meters in the Gyeongbuk-gun, the Daegu District Court: (a) as to the 10,000 square meters in the 105 square meters in the 105 square meters in the Gyeongbuk-gun; (b) as the 9794 receipt on September 10, 2013, the 19794 senior branch office of the Daegu District Court, the registration for the establishment of a mortgage for the establishment of a neighboring mortgage-holder was completed; and (c) as the 1557 maximum debt amount received on February 7, 2014, the 345,00,000,0000 collective security holders

B. On March 27, 2014, the Defendant applied for the instant real estate and rendered a decision to voluntarily commence the auction to the Seogu District Court Branch C.

On October 28, 2014, the auction court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes the amount of KRW 321,225,296 to the plaintiff and F, who are the mortgagee, to the defendant, who is the mortgagee, in the first priority order of KRW 78,848,219, and the second priority order of KRW 91,121,863, and third priority to the defendant, the mortgagee, in the second priority order of KRW 91,25,214.

C. On the aforementioned date of distribution, the Plaintiff raised an objection to the entire amount of the Defendant’s dividends, and on November 3, 2014, filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution of the instant case.

【Facts without dispute over the ground for recognition】 Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 15, entry of evidence Nos. 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that since the defendant and E did not cancel the registration of establishment of a mortgage in the name of the defendant with respect to the real estate in this case and received the defendant's dividends based on the registration, the amount of dividends against the defendant should be distributed to the plaintiff in full to the plaintiff, even though they conspired with the defendant and E fully repaid the defendant's obligation to the defendant.

In a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, the burden of proof as to the grounds for objection against distribution is in accordance with the principle of distribution of burden of proof in general civil procedure. Therefore, in a case where the plaintiff asserts that the defendant's claim has not been constituted, the defendant is responsible