1. A distribution schedule prepared on September 4, 2014 by the said court with respect to the auction case of real estate C in Changwon District Court smuggling C.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 12, 2013, the procedure for the auction of the real estate rent C with the Changwon District Court (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) was commenced on September 12, 2013 with respect to each real estate indicated in the separate list, and the Plaintiff made a demand for distribution to the said court as the mortgagee of the right to collateral security and the creditor of the provisional seizure. On September 4, 2014, the court of execution prepared the distribution schedule as the distribution schedule to the Defendants, each of whom the Defendants, who made a demand for distribution as the lessee of the small amount on September 4, 2014, as the date of distribution, KRW 14,200,000,012 (the mortgagee of the right to collateral security), KRW 75,792,853 (the amount of claim), KRW 30,017,505 (the mortgagee of the right to collateral security), KRW 15,754 (the amount of claim based on the name of the right to provisional seizure, KRW 13,29662,660 (hereinafter “the distribution schedule”).

B. The Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and raised an objection against the total amount of the dividend of the Defendants, and filed the instant lawsuit on September 11, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries and images of evidence A1 to 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendants received distribution as a small lessee who leased the building listed in the [Attachment List No. 5 (hereinafter “instant building”). The instant building was deemed to have been already destroyed at the time of the commencement of the voluntary auction procedure, and the Defendants did not reside in the instant building. The Defendants asserted that the distribution schedule should be revised by striking the portion not paid by the Plaintiff out of the amount of dividends to the Defendants, thereby distributing it to the Plaintiff.

B. Defendant A asserted that, on April 30, 2012, Defendant A had the right to receive dividends in preference to the Plaintiff as a legitimate small-sum lessee who completed and resided in the move-in report after leasing the instant building from D in KRW 35,000,000.

Defendant B is from April 30, 2012 D.