1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 11, 2001, 2001, the Social Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) of the Eastyang (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) filed a lawsuit for the claim for the acquisition of money against C with this Court 2005da76059, and the judgment below became final and conclusive on Oct. 11, 2001, that “the Defendant would pay to the Plaintiff 1,289,720 won and KRW 1,049,500 with interest of 28% per annum from March 4, 2005 to the day of full payment.”

B. Upon the transfer of the foregoing claim from the non-party company, the Plaintiff was granted the succession execution clause on February 10, 2012, and C completed the registration of seizure of the right to collateral security on October 16, 2014 upon obtaining the attachment order on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the non-party company as a collateral security holder C as of July 10, 2003, which was established as of July 10, 2003.

On the other hand, on June 9, 2014, the defendant also received the attachment order of C's above claims against C on June 9, 2014, and completed the attachment registration of the mortgage on June 30, 2014.

C. On March 6, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for the auction of real estate rent with this court B.

On December 12, 2014, when the successful bid price was fully paid, the auction court opened a date of distribution on the date of distribution on December 12, 2014, and prepared a distribution schedule to distribute the amount of KRW 10,174,646 to the defendant, who is the holder of the right to distribute KRW 7,410, and KRW 9,912,963 to the defendant, who is the holder of the right to claim, and KRW 254,273 to the plaintiff, the creditor.

The plaintiff stated that he had an objection to the whole amount of dividends of the defendant on the date of distribution, and the auction court suspended the distribution of the portion of the objection and made the distribution in accordance with the distribution schedule only for the portion of the objection.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry (including paper numbers) of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is based on a false monetary loan agreement with the Defendant that the Defendant and C had the liability of KRW 150,000,000, in spite of the absence of the obligation owed by C to the Defendant.