1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On July 21, 2010, on the premise of the dispute, the ownership transfer registration was completed on July 21, 2010 regarding the apartment as indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

D The deceased on September 13, 2014, and on June 8, 2015, the registration of ownership transfer due to inheritance was completed in relation to the shares of 3/7 shares in E, the spouse (e.g., the spouse) of the deceased D (hereinafter “the deceased”) among the apartment of this case on June 8, 2015.

The Plaintiff filed an application for provisional attachment against the instant apartment in common with the Seoul Central District Court 2015Kadan705 with the monetary claim of KRW 80,571,430 against E, F, and G as the claim amounting to KRW 53,714,285 against each of the monetary claims of KRW 53,714,285 against E. The provisional attachment against the instant apartment in common was completed on June 12, 2015 upon the above court’s provisional attachment acceptance and the entrustment of registration.

In the instant apartment auction case (hereinafter “instant auction case” or “instant auction procedure”) concerning the instant apartment, which was commenced on August 19, 2015 upon the application of the Korea Housing Finance Corporation, the mortgagee of the mortgage on the instant apartment (the maximum claim amount of KRW 158,400,00), the execution court drafted a distribution schedule on February 18, 2016 that distributes the amount of KRW 48,907,845 out of the amount of KRW 50,00,000, which the Defendant demanded to the Defendant on the ground that he is a housing lessee with a fixed date, on the ground that he is a housing lessee with a fixed date.

Since the amount to be distributed after the above dividends to the Defendant remains, the Plaintiff did not receive any distribution, even though it was the provisional attachment authority for the apartment of this case.

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution of the instant auction procedure, and stated an objection against the total amount of distribution to the Defendant during the said distribution schedule, and filed the instant lawsuit within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap 1, 2, and 5 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: The Defendant, the former owner of the instant apartment.