1. The document prepared on December 10, 2015 by the above court with respect to the compulsory auction case of Suwon District Court B real estate B in Sungnam District Court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. In order to secure the claim against C, the Plaintiff completed a provisional attachment registration that constitutes 164,00,000 of the claimed amount on February 26, 2013 with respect to the 27.16 square meters of the 1st floor among the 2nd floor housing in Seongdong-gu, Sung-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-si, Seoul Metropolitan City Do Do Do Da (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On February 2, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for compulsory auction on the instant real estate B with the Suwon District Court, Seongbuk-nam Branch, and the said court rendered a decision to commence compulsory auction on February 3, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant auction”). C.

On February 23, 2011, the Defendant: (a) concluded a lease agreement of KRW 21,00,000 for the instant real estate with C; and (b) from April 30, 201 to April 29, 2013 for the term of lease (hereinafter “the lease of this case”); (c) claimed “B; and (d) filed an application for a report on rights and a request for distribution with the Auction Court around March 2, 2015, when the instant auction procedure was in progress.

The completion period for demand for distribution of the auction procedure of this case is April 13, 2015.

E. On December 10, 2015, the auction court prepared a distribution schedule that distributes the amount of KRW 103,191,642 to the Defendant, a lessee of small claims, to the Plaintiff, who is the obligee, in the fourth order, to pay KRW 21,00,00,00, and KRW 60,486,045, respectively (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

F. The Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and stated an objection against the full amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on December 17, 2015, which was within seven days thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1, 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of the parties (1) The Defendant is the most lessee who concluded a false lease agreement on the instant real estate in order to receive a small amount of deposit under the Housing Lease Protection Act.

② Possession of the instant real estate by the Defendant was lost on March 201, which was prior to the completion period to demand a distribution.