1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs, as a woman, shared the respective ratios of Plaintiff A3/5 and Plaintiff B2/5 with respect to the land of this case, which is the number of 5,438 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On September 4, 2012, the Plaintiffs agreed to set up a right to collateral security on the instant real estate as security for Alc Co., Ltd.’s obligation for the payment of goods to the Defendant against Alc Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AcC”), and concluded on September 5, 2012, the establishment registration of collateral security against Alc Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”). On September 5, 2012, the Plaintiffs completed the registration of collateral security against the Defendant as the obligor, Alc Co., Ltd., and the obligor

C. On March 21, 2014, the Defendant applied for voluntary auction of the instant land based on the instant collateral security.

On March 24, 2014, Suwon District Court D opened a voluntary auction procedure for the land of this case. D.

On August 12, 2015, the above court: (a) distributed KRW 150,00,000 to F, who is a senior mortgagee, among the amounts to be actually distributed on the date of distribution open on August 12, 2015; (b) KRW 825,730 to the Defendant, who is a mortgagee, the right to deliver the pertinent tax; (c) KRW 13,414,291 to the Defendant, who is a mortgagee; and (d) KRW 19,971,113 to the Republic of Korea, which is the right to seize; and (d) written a distribution schedule that did not distribute to the Plaintiffs, who are the right holder.

E. The Plaintiffs raised an objection to the total amount of dividends to the Defendant.

F. Meanwhile, the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, as Suwon District Court Decision 2015Gahap5340, asserting that “The Defendant had caused damages to the Plaintiffs by conducting an auction even though there was no secured obligation of the instant collateral security,” etc., but the said court dismissed the Plaintiffs’ claim on July 12, 2016. The Plaintiffs appealed appealed as Seoul High Court Decision 2016Na2053723, but the said judgment of the first instance court became final and conclusive by withdrawing it on December 6, 2016.

【Ground of recognition】 dispute.