1. The distribution schedule prepared by the above court with respect to the application case for voluntary auction of the B real estate in Gyeyang-gu District Court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 2, 2013, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with D, the owner of C Apartment 121 Dong 2103 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on December 2, 2013, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with D as stipulated in the said lease agreement between KRW 15,000,000 for the instant real estate, KRW 550,00 for the rent, KRW 50 for the rent, and the rental period from December 24, 2013 to December 23, 2015.

The defendant obtained a move-in report and a fixed date on December 24, 2013.

B. On March 28, 2012, the instant real estate in progress with the auction procedure was completed with the right to collateral security (174,000,000 won with the maximum debt amount under the Plaintiff’s name). However, the Plaintiff filed an application for the auction procedure on May 7, 2014, when selling and buying real estate, with the Ji Government District Court Goyang Branch B.

The defendant reported the demand for distribution and the right as a lessee in the above procedure.

C. On December 22, 2014, the lower court drafted a distribution schedule with the purport of allocating KRW 14,000,000 corresponding to the small amount deposit to the Plaintiff and distributing KRW 137,249,664 to the Defendant.

Accordingly, the plaintiff raised an objection against the amount of dividends on the date of distribution.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the distribution schedule of this case where the defendant distributed small amount of deposit to the defendant is unfair, since the defendant is the most lessee who entered into a lease agreement to receive the small amount of deposit by abusing the Housing Lease Protection Act.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that it is the true tenant who entered into a lease contract with respect to the real estate of this case and paid all the deposit money, and thus, it constitutes a small-sum lessee.

3. In full view of the aforementioned evidence and evidence Nos. 1 to 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the provision of financial transaction information to the National Bank and the Nonghyup Bank, the Defendant’s deposit money for the lease of the instant real estate.