1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On February 19, 2009, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring establishment on the ground of a contract to establish a new land on the same day with respect to the land size of 2,620 square meters and E 820 square meters owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). B.

The Defendant filed an application for voluntary auction (the same court C) on the basis of the instant right to collateral security with the Cheongju District Court, and the auction court prepared on January 27, 2014 a distribution schedule that distributes KRW 82,927,397 to the Defendant on the date of distribution open on January 27, 2014, and the Plaintiff raised an objection against the entire amount of dividends to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 7-1, 2, and Gap evidence 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted on February 13, 2009 that the loan contract and the certificate of loan in the amount of KRW 50,000,000 were prepared to the Defendant on February 13, 2009, but there was no received KRW 50,00,000 from the Defendant. Thus, there was no secured claim of the instant right to collateral security.

Therefore, it is illegal that the auction court distributes the amount of KRW 82,927,397 to the defendant, so the above amount of dividend against the defendant should be deleted.

B. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff: (a) made a loan contract, loan certificate, receipt, promissory note, or collateral security contract to the Defendant; and (b) borrowed KRW 50,000,000 while issuing a certificate of personal seal impression, proxy certificate, resident registration certificate, abstract, and certificate of registration; and (c) F and G actually received the Plaintiff’s consent and used the above loan amount.

Therefore, the secured claim of the instant right to collateral security exists effectively and the distribution of the secured claim against the Defendant is lawful.

3. The burden of proof as to the grounds for objection against distribution in a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution on the market is also in accordance with the principle of distribution of the burden of proof in general civil procedure, and the plaintiff asserts that the defendant's claim has not been established