1. The distribution schedule prepared on February 4, 2014 by the above court with respect to the Seoul Northern District Court B real estate auction case.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 13, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with D on June 13, 201 with respect to the lease deposit amount of KRW 25 million with respect to 1 of Dobong-gu Seoul E Branchal Floor (hereinafter “instant housing”) owned by C (hereinafter “instant housing”), from June 17, 2011 to June 16, 2013 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and paid KRW 200,000 as the down payment on the same day, and KRW 23 million as of June 17, 201.

B. Around that time, the Plaintiff moved to the instant housing, and completed the move-in report after receiving a fixed date from the instant lease agreement on January 7, 2013.

C. Meanwhile, on January 24, 2013, a decision to voluntarily commence the auction was rendered to the Seoul Northern District Court B regarding the instant housing. The said court distributed KRW 57,146,39, the amount to be actually distributed on February 4, 2014, which is the date of distribution, to the small lessee, except the Plaintiff who reported the right of KRW 25,000 as a small lessee and demanded the distribution as a dividend, and, in the first priority order, drafted a distribution schedule with the content that distributes KRW 106,160,040,179 to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and raised an objection against KRW 25 million among the amount distributed by the Defendant, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution on February 7, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 10, 16, 17 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Plaintiff should revise the instant distribution schedule by preferentially distributing the amount of KRW 25 million to the Defendant, as the Plaintiff had preferential right to payment of KRW 25 million as the lessee of the instant house.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant, at the time of lending the instant house as collateral, was residing without compensation by F in the instant house, and only when the Plaintiff reached January 7, 2013, the moving-in report on the instant house is made.