1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On September 2017, the Defendant applied for the commencement of a discretionary auction of real estate as to each real estate indicated in the indication of the attached real estate No. 1, and on September 21, 2017, Incheon District Court rendered a voluntary decision to commence auction of real estate as D with regard to each of the above real estate.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant auction”) the auction proceeds following the said decision to commence the voluntary auction.

On October 11, 2018, this Court, as shown in attached Table 2, distributed KRW 11,20,820 to the Incheon Metropolitan City Reinforcement-gun, KRW 86,709,00 in the first priority order to the Incheon Metropolitan City Reinforcement-gun, KRW 9,708,317,267 in the second priority order to the Plaintiff, who is a mortgagee, and drafted a distribution schedule (hereinafter referred to as the “instant distribution schedule”) that did not distribute to the Plaintiff on the grounds that there is no remaining amount.

C. On October 17, 2018, the Plaintiff raised an objection against KRW 70,790,442 out of the amount of dividends to the Defendant on the said date of distribution, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on October 17, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, 9 (including evidence with serial number), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. As recognized in Seoul Southern District Court’s protocol of conciliation in the case of 2007Da11579 Decided December 16, 201, the claims held by the Defendant against E and F are divided claims as well as KRW 1,616,430,949 when the Defendant calculates the amount of claims owed by E. As such, the Defendant is KRW 1,616,430,949.

However, since the dividends against the defendant stated in the instant distribution schedule are a large amount of KRW 9,708,317,267, the amount of dividends against the defendant and the amount of dividends against the plaintiff should be modified as stated in the purport of the claim.

B. The Defendant’s summary E and F’s obligations owed to the Defendant are not divided but recognized in Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Gahap26901 and its appellate judgment.