The distribution schedule prepared on March 12, 2020 by the above court in the case of voluntary auction of D's real estate for the original district court of Chuncheon.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 5, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Nonparty E on the condition that the lease contract was concluded between KRW 120,00,000,00 and June 26, 2021 with respect to the lease of KRW 111.1 square meters on the second floor among the two detached houses located in Won-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant real estate”). On June 12, 2018, the lease agreement was concluded between the Plaintiff and Nonparty E, with respect to the lease of KRW 120,00,000,000, and the lease period was from June 27, 2018.

B. At the time of the above lease agreement, E agreed to complete the registration of the establishment of the right to lease on a deposit basis to the Plaintiff after changing the maximum amount of claims of G association (hereinafter “Non-Party G association”) from KRW 494,00,000 to KRW 350,000,000, but E did not implement the agreement.

(c)

On June 18, 2019, with respect to the instant real estate upon an application for the commencement of voluntary auction by the GJ (U.S. original branch D), the decision was made on June 18, 2019. On March 12, 2020, the distribution table was prepared to distribute the dividend amount of KRW 47,603,954 to the Plaintiff, who is the lessee, as well as the amount of KRW 17,00,000 to the Defendant’s small lessee, respectively (hereinafter “instant distribution table”).

(c)

The Plaintiff appeared on the dividend date and stated an objection against the total amount of dividends to the Defendants, and filed an objection to the instant dividend on the same day.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap's evidence 1 to 2 (including branch numbers)

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is not an actual lessee, but the Plaintiff’s primary purpose is to collect the claim prior to a prior mortgagee by being protected as a small lessee even though the actual lessee was a small lessee. Therefore, the Plaintiff asserted that each dividend amount against the Defendants cannot be protected as a small lessee and sought correction of the dividend list by eliminating the amount of the claim and distributing the amount equivalent to that amount to the Plaintiff.

B. First, we examine the claim against the defendant B.

Defendant B shall be E.W.