1. The Defendant is against the Plaintiff KRW 42,563,612 out of the dividends deposited with Suwon District Court No. 2016 Geum66.

1. Basic facts

A. As to the real estate owned C, the Defendant filed an application for a compulsory auction (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) with Suwon District Court D with respect to the said real estate, and at the instant auction procedure, on May 11, 2016, the said court prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) to the Defendant, the applicant creditor, who is the applicant creditor, with the order of priority of KRW 55,00,000,000 with the lessee F with the fixed date, and KRW 21,152,681, and KRW 6,180,466, who is the applicant creditor, with the order of priority of KRW 6,180,66.

B. The Defendant filed a lawsuit of demurrer against F and the Plaintiff at the above court No. 2016da52540, and the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff on the ground that the guarantee contract does not constitute a fraudulent act on the ground that F is the most lessee on July 6, 2017. However, the guarantee contract between the Plaintiff and C should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and that the guarantee contract between the Plaintiff and C should be restored as of January 23, 2013, and that the amount of dividends against the Plaintiff should be distributed to the Defendant.

The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

C. The Plaintiff filed a provisional disposition with respect to KRW 42,563,612 among the Defendant’s claim for payment of deposit dividends of KRW 55 million (hereinafter “instant dividend”) with the Suwon District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch of Suwon District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Office (hereinafter “instant dividend”) pursuant to the Defendant’s claim for return of unjust enrichment against the Defendant as the preserved right, and received a provisional disposition order from the said court on August 2, 2017, as the purport of the application.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The right under substantive law is to make a distribution in accordance with the distribution schedule established by the relevant legal doctrine.