1. It was drawn up by this court on December 29, 2016, with respect to the case of voluntary auction of D real estate in Daejeon District Court Branch D.

1. Basic facts

A. E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) completed on Nov. 7, 2008 the registration of creation of each of the maximum debt amount of 2.8 billion won and 1.5 billion won, and on Mar. 31, 2009, the registration of creation of each of the maximum debt amount of 3.6 billion won to the Industrial Bank of Korea on Nov. 7, 2008 with respect to the F land and the ground buildings in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seoul.

On February 15, 2016, the Industrial Bank of Korea filed an application for voluntary auction on the above real estate based on each of the above collateral security rights, and the procedure of voluntary auction on the real estate was initiated as Daejeon District Court Branch D (hereinafter “instant auction”).

B. On September 2, 2016, the Industrial Bank of Korea concluded a joint asset management company and a joint asset management company with the Plaintiff on September 28, 2016, and transferred claims against E and the aforementioned collateral security to secure them. Around that time, the Industrial Bank of Korea notified E of the transfer of the above credit.

C. On April 14, 2016, the Defendants demanded the distribution as E’s wage obligee at the instant auction procedure. D.

In the instant auction procedure on December 29, 2016, the distribution schedule was prepared to distribute the amount of KRW 27,610,038 among the amount to be actually distributed on the date of distribution open on December 29, 2016, to Defendant A, who is a wage obligee, KRW 24,970,117, and KRW 11,870,967 to Defendant C, and KRW 24,970,967 to Defendant C, who is a right holder of the right to request re-registration, and KRW 3,852,74,058 to the Defendant of the Industrial Bank of Korea’s successor to the right to request re-registration (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

E. The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and raised an objection to the total amount of the dividend of the Defendants, and filed the instant lawsuit on January 5, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 8, 14, 15 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Defendants asserted that they are workers E and recognized the status as wage creditors, and received dividends in the instant auction procedure, but the Defendants were paid remunerations and positions.