1. A distribution table prepared by the said court on September 23, 2014 with respect to the case of the auction of real estate B and C (Dual) in Incheon District Court.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in the entry of evidence A(2) together with the purport of the entire pleadings:

D With respect to the registration of creation of a mortgage on November 1, 2010, the maximum debt amount of 88,400,000,000 won, and the registration of creation of a mortgage, the plaintiff of the right to collateral security, was completed on November 1, 2010.

B. On the basis of the application for a voluntary auction of real estate by the plaintiff et al., the Incheon District Court B and C (Dual) rendered a decision to commence the auction of real estate of this case around 2012.

C. On September 23, 2014, the auction court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes the amount of KRW 529,476,264 to the Plaintiff, who is the applicant creditor (the mortgagee) in the order of priority 4,00,000, and the third priority 529,476,264 to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”). The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the Defendant’s amount of KRW 6,00,000 out of the amount of dividends.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that since the plaintiff is a small lessee who resides in the lease contract set forth in KRW 10,00,000 with respect to the real estate of this case after entering into a lease contract set forth in KRW 10,000,000 for the lease deposit with D, the plaintiff should be additionally distributed KRW 6,000,000 which was not paid out of the lease deposit. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the contents of the lease contract entered into between the plaintiff and D are 5,00,000,000 for the lease deposit and the monthly rent of KRW 40,00,000, the amount of dividends to the plaintiff

B. The following circumstances, which are: (a) the evidence mentioned above, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 4, and the witness witness witness witness witness testimony, were determined as KRW 10,000 and leased the instant real estate from D around December 21, 2010; and (b) the Plaintiff wired D, under the name of the wife F, the sum total of KRW 5,00,000,000, total of KRW 2,000 on December 21, 2010, and KRW 5,000,000,000.