1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1.The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by adding to the whole purport of the pleadings the entries in Gap evidence 1 to 3, and Eul evidence 1 to 8.

On August 23, 2017, E had the Plaintiff, F, G, and H as an inheritor.

B. The Defendant filed an application for the auction of automobile rent with the Seoul East Eastern District Court D on the network E-owned truck, for which the right to collateral security was established.

C. On July 9, 2018, the said motor vehicle was sold on the bidding date. On August 21, 2018, the Defendant submitted a claim statement of KRW 18,407,970 in total to the dividend court (as of September 6, 2018, the principal amount was KRW 13,887,910, interest KRW 256,270, etc.).

On September 6, 2018, the distribution court prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that the Defendant, who is the applicant creditor, distributes the amount of KRW 7,750,000, out of KRW 12,278,054, which is an actual amount to be distributed after deducting execution expenses from the proceeds of sale, to the Defendant, who is the applicant creditor, in the second order.

E. The plaintiff appeared on the date of the above distribution and stated an objection against the whole of the dividend amount to the defendant, and other creditors, debtors, owners, and creditors did not raise an objection.

2. The plaintiff asserted and determined that it is unlawful for the court to additionally distribute the remaining amount exceeding the maximum debt amount of the defendant to the defendant, among the dividend amount to be distributed, to the defendant in the second priority order. Thus, the plaintiff asserts that the second priority dividend amount against the defendant in the distribution schedule of this case should be revoked and that the amount should be corrected to be distributed to the plaintiff.

However, unless there is a creditor entitled to dividends pursuant to Articles 268 and 148 of the Civil Execution Act or a third party purchaser, if the amount of claims by the mortgagee exceeds the maximum amount of claims of the mortgagee, even if there is an amount exceeding the maximum amount of claims of the mortgagee, it shall not be returned to the mortgagee of the right to collateral security, and it