1. The distribution schedule prepared on December 5, 2018 by the same court with respect to the auction of real estate C in Ulsan District Court C.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 4, 2016, E Co., Ltd. completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage with the maximum debt amount of KRW 387,600,000 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by D (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and the establishment of a neighboring mortgage with the maximum debt amount of KRW 117,60,000,000, respectively.

On June 25, 2018, the Plaintiff completed the additional registration of the right to collateral security transfer with respect to the registration of the establishment of each of the above facilities.

B. As to the instant real estate, the discretionary auction procedure was conducted to Ulsan District Court C, and the Defendant, a father, applied for a report of right and a demand for distribution pursuant to the lease contract (Evidence A. 8; hereinafter the same shall apply) on the instant real estate.

C. On December 5, 2018, the instant real estate was sold at KRW 379,150,000, and on the date of open distribution on December 5, 2018, the ordinary court prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) stating that KRW 374,288,885, the amount to be actually distributed, excluding the cost of execution, was KRW 20,000,000, and that the amount to be distributed to the Defendant (the highest preferential lessee), the second-class F Co., Ltd. (the holder of the pledge right on collateral security), was distributed to the second-class F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

On the date of the above distribution, the Plaintiff appeared as a creditor, and stated an objection against the total amount of the Defendant’s dividends, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution against the Defendant within seven days thereafter.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 13 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The plaintiff primarily asserts that the defendant should delete the amount of distribution of the defendant and distribute it to the plaintiff, on the ground that the lease contract of this case as the most tenant is invalid as a false declaration of intention, and thus, it constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to D's general creditors.

B. In a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, the grounds for objection against distribution are relevant.