1. All appeals filed against the main claim and counterclaim by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the appeal filed by the Defendant C against the main claim are dismissed.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

(1) In light of the records in the execution officer’s real estate inspection report and the appraisal report prepared by a certified public appraiser, it is insufficient to reverse the above recognition by itself. Thus, in light of the records in the execution officer’s real estate inspection report and the appraisal report prepared by a certified public appraiser, the Defendants’ claim against the Plaintiff on a different premise is justified, and thus, the Defendants cannot be deemed to have occupied the instant real estate from December 26, 2012, which was registered as the entry of the order to commence commencement of auction of this case. Defendant B appears to possess the said real estate from March 12, 2013. In short, in light of the records in the execution officer’s real estate inspection report and the appraisal report prepared by the certified public appraiser, the above recognition is insufficient. Accordingly, the Defendants’ assertion on a different premise is rejected, and the first instance judgment is justifiable. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s counterclaim claim against Defendant B is dismissed. As such, the judgment of the first instance is justifiable and the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed.