1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On April 12, 2013, the non-party 1 (hereinafter “the non-party 1-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-3-2-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-4-2-3-2-3-3-3-3-4-2-4-2-4-2-3-

B. Pursuant to the aforementioned procedures, the said court ordered affiliated enforcement officers to investigate the current status of the real estate Nos. 1 and 2 of this case, and prepared a survey report on the current status around April 26, 2013. The said survey report entered matters concerning the current status of the real estate Nos. 1 and 27 of this case.

(3) On the other hand, on May 6, 2013, the above court issued a fact-finding inquiry on the instant real estate Nos. 1 and 2, and on May 6, 2013, submitted a fact-finding reply to the purport that the court permitted the diversion of farmland (construction report) for the purpose of detached houses among the instant real estate Nos. 1, 2, and 3.

(4) In addition, according to the above court’s order of appraisal, an appraiser submitted the first appraisal report on the instant real estate Nos. 1 and 2 as of May 3, 2013. The appraisal value of the said real estate was KRW 3,044,680,980.

On March 17, 2014, an appraiser submitted an appraisal and supplementary opinion to the effect that the appraised value of the pertinent real estate shall be increased to KRW 3,053,880,980, by adding the value of the structure other than the fixed structure to KRW 9,20,00 in the appraised value of the said real estate.

(5) Accordingly, in the process of the sale of the instant lists Nos. 1 and 2, but failed several times, the said court, as of August 17, 2015, prepared a detailed statement of the goods to be sold in connection with the instant auction procedure, and as of August 17, 2015, indicated the “minimum sale price of the real estate and the appraised value” in the said detailed statement