1. The defendant among the distribution schedule prepared on November 19, 2014 by the Ulsan District Court K in the auction procedure of real estate, and prepared by the same court.

1. Basic facts

A. L died on March 6, 201, and his/her child is Defendant B, Defendant C, M, Defendant F, N, and Defendant J.

M died on March 24, 2007, and Defendant D is his spouse and Defendant E.

N died on January 2007, and Defendant G is his spouse, Defendant H, and Defendant I’s own child.

B. The Defendants completed the registration of transfer of shares in accordance with their inheritance shares on March 6, 201, with respect to the building Nos. 208, 1202 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S. (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

C. On February 21, 2014, the Nonindicted Agricultural Cooperative, the mortgagee of the instant apartment, filed an application for the auction of real estate for the instant apartment with the Ulsan District Court (K), and the said court rendered a voluntary decision to commence the auction on February 21, 2014, and prepared a distribution schedule with the same content as the dividend amount of each Defendant stated in the separate sheet.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 8, Gap evidence 6, 7-1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1-1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 5, 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the de facto owner of the instant apartment, and the Plaintiff leased the instant real estate from Defendant E on February 15, 2013 to KRW 70 million.

In other words, L donated the instant apartment to his third female M around 1994, and M donated it to Defendant E, and the Plaintiff was leased while Defendant E occupied and used it.

B. As to Defendant D and E’s assertion, the said Defendants are deemed to have led to confession pursuant to Article 150(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

C. Defendant B, C, F, G, H, I, and J (i) Defendant E’s assertion is not a legitimate owner of the apartment of this case, and the terms of the Plaintiff’s assertion are false.

D. Defendant E argues that Defendant E prepared a lease contract with the Plaintiff, and submitted a lease contract (No. B. 1). However, the Plaintiff made an oral lease contract with Defendant E.