1. Of the distribution schedule prepared by the said court on February 26, 2019 in the case of a compulsory auction by official auction of the Daejeon District Court D Real Estate Branch D.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 21, 2015, F Co., Ltd. was sentenced to the Busan District Court Decision 2015Da39421, that “F shall pay 20% interest per annum for KRW 35,815,401 won to E Co., Ltd. and KRW 6,575,301 among them, from July 31, 2004, KRW 29,240,100 per annum from August 22, 2005 to the date of full payment,” and the Plaintiff received succession of execution clause.

B. On December 29, 2017, based on a claim based on the above judgment, the Plaintiff applied for a compulsory auction on the 328.9 square meters in Gongju-si and the ASEAN 328.9 square meters on the ground of the official branch of the Daejeon District Court, which is owned by F, and applied for a compulsory auction on the 99.28 square meters of a house on the ground of the Kacoisllllll (hereinafter “instant building”) and received a compulsory auction order on January 11, 2018.

C. On March 30, 2018, the Defendant, who is F and the same bookbook, filed a report on the right and demand for distribution as follows, alleging that he/she had a claim of KRW 25 million with respect to the instant building in the above auction procedure.

The lease portion: The lease deposit for the entire building of this case: The lease period: November 20, 2016 to November 20, 2018: the fixed date: May 2, 2012: the contract date on March 7, 2018: November 20, 2016.

On February 26, 2019, the above court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes KRW 25 million to the Defendant, who is a lessee, in the order of 3rd priority on the date of distribution, and 38,813,283 to the Plaintiff, who is the applicant creditor, in the order of 6th priority (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”), and the Plaintiff raised an objection against the total amount of the Defendant’s dividends.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant stated the KRW 25 million for the purpose of receiving a dividend in the auction procedure of this case, even though the Plaintiff did not have any security deposit, as F and the Dong branch, had been residing free of charge in the building of this case.