1. As to the auction case of the real estate B in Gwangju District Court, the said court prepared on October 24, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 29, 199, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the attached list owned by the deceased C (the deceased on July 29, 2009; hereinafter “the deceased”) (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) due to a contract establishing a mortgage (hereinafter “instant mortgage”) dated March 5, 199, with respect to the real estate as indicated in the attached list owned by the deceased C (the deceased on July 29, 2009) (hereinafter “the instant real estate”).

B. On February 16, 2017, upon the Defendant’s application, the Gwangju District Court rendered a decision to commence a compulsory auction B on February 16, 2017.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant auction procedure”). C.

The Defendant completed the registration of subrogation of each transfer of ownership with respect to the instant real estate in subrogation of D, E, F, G, H, I, and J, the inheritor of the Deceased District Court, as the receipt of No. 4697 on March 2, 2017, from 3/15, E, F, G, H, I, and J on the ground of inheritance on July 11, 2009.

(1) The creditor's dividends on the ground that the creditor's dividends are reasonable; (2) the distribution ratio of the dividends on the amount of claims (%) to Defendant 1's 30,000,000 to Defendant 1's 30,000 to Defendant 2's 100 to Plaintiff 66,269,400 to Plaintiff 2's 4,701,303.71% to Defendant 2

D. Of the distribution schedule prepared for the amount of KRW 35,424,580 to be actually distributed at the instant auction procedure (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”), the part related to the instant case is as follows.

E. The Plaintiff appeared on the above date of distribution and raised an objection to the total amount of the Defendant’s dividends.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2-1, 2-3-2 through 5, 5-5, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant secured claim does not exist, and even if the secured claim exists, the instant secured claim does not exist.

Even to the effect that the ten-year prescription has expired due to the completion of the ten-year prescription.

B. Determination 1-related legal principles guarantee the right to collateral security.