1. With respect to the Seoul Central District Court B (C), D (Dual), and D (Dual) auction of real estate, the above court on December 23, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 15, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of provisional seizure of KRW 27,562,847 as to the real estate listed in the [Attachment List E (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Defendant’s Defendant’s (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and the judgment was finalized on August 13, 2015, that “E, etc. jointly and severally, shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 27,562,847 and delay damages therefor,” which the Plaintiff filed a claim against E and F (representative E).

(Seoul Central District Court 2015dan5161387).(b)

With respect to the instant real estate on September 20, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis (hereinafter “instant right to lease on a deposit basis”) with E as to the instant real estate from September 29, 2013 to September 28, 2015, and from September 2015, the Defendant completed the registration for establishment of a right to lease on a deposit basis (hereinafter “registration for establishment of a right to lease on a deposit basis”) on December 18, 2013.

C. On February 9, 2015, the voluntary auction on the instant real estate commenced on February 9, 2015 (Seoul Central District Court B (C, D (Dual), and the auction court on December 23, 2015, KRW 27,562,847 out of the amount of provisional attachment claim against the Plaintiff on the date of distribution, and KRW 62,705,720 out of the amount of claim against the Defendant as the person having a right to lease on a deposit basis (20.9% of the amount of claim); and the distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

D. On December 23, 2015, the Plaintiff appeared on the date of the foregoing distribution and raised an objection against KRW 27,562,847 out of the amount of dividends against the Defendant. 【Unfounded-founded grounds for recognition, the entries in Gap 1 or 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant entered into a false contract with E for the purpose of evading compulsory execution by the creditors, including the Plaintiff. Therefore, the part of the Plaintiff’s claim amount out of the dividend amount against the Defendant is deleted from the dividend amount against the Defendant.