1. The auction case of Suwon District Court B, which was prepared by the said court on February 23, 2015, with respect to the real estate auction case of Suwon District Court B.

1. Basic facts

A. Seoul Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter “Seoul Savings Bank”) concluded a mortgage agreement with C on March 14, 201 with respect to the instant real estate owned by C as KRW 152,100,000,000 on March 11, 201 and completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on March 11, 201, with the maximum interest rate of KRW 10.7% per annum, the maximum interest rate of KRW 23% per annum, the due date for repayment, and March 14, 2015 (hereinafter “instant loan”). In order to secure the instant loan claim, the Seoul Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter “Seoul Savings Bank”) concluded a mortgage agreement with C as the debtor with respect to the instant real estate owned by C as of March 10, 2011.

B. On September 26, 2013, Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Hahap139 decided on bankruptcy, the Plaintiff was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy on the same day.

C. E delayed repayment of the instant loan. On May 19, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for a voluntary auction of real estate regarding the instant real estate, and the decision to commence the auction (hereinafter “instant auction”) was made on May 19, 2014. On February 23, 2015, the executing court drafted a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that the Defendant distributes KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff, in the second order, on the grounds that the Defendant is a small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act, on the date of distribution of the instant auction, on the grounds that the Defendant is a small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act.

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and stated an objection against the full amount of the dividend to the Defendant, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution on February 27, 2015, which was within seven days thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5 and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is selected: (a) a lease agreement entered into between the Defendant and C, the wife on April 22, 2013, setting the deposit amount of KRW 20 million with respect to the instant real estate is invalid as a false declaration of agreement; or (b) the Defendant’s abuse of the preferential repayment system for small tenants under the Housing Lease Protection Act.