1. A distribution schedule prepared by the same court on December 30, 2014 with respect to the case of application for a voluntary auction of real estate C by the Incheon District Court.

Basic Facts

On April 14, 2008, the right to collateral security was established with a maximum debt amount of KRW 46,800,000, which was owned by Nonparty D (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

(hereinafter “The instant secured claim”). At the request of the Incheon Fisheries Cooperatives, the auction procedure was commenced on December 4, 2013 regarding the instant real estate upon the application of the Incheon Fisheries Cooperatives.

(C) The Defendant filed a report on the right and demand for distribution by asserting that it is a lessee who paid the lease deposit amount of KRW 15 million with respect to the instant real estate during the above auction procedure.

On June 25, 2014, the claim of the Incheon Fisheries Cooperatives was transferred to IMC on the same day (No. 61169). On the same day, the right to collateral security was established with respect to the claim of the Korea Securities Depository (No. 61170) (No. 6170). On the same day, the claim of IMC was transferred to the Plaintiff with respect to the claim of the Korea Securities Depository (No. 61171), and the registration of the additional registration of the right to collateral security and the right to collateral security was completed on the same day.

On the date of distribution implemented on December 30, 2014, this Court distributed KRW 15 million to the Defendant on the date of distribution, and distributed KRW 25,417,290 out of KRW 45,159,754, among the amount of credit 45,159,754, to the Gyeyang Savings Bank Co., Ltd., the pledger of the right to collateral security.

On the date of distribution, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the amount of distribution to the Defendant.

(A) On July 10, 2013, the court below held that the Plaintiff had the right to receive the remainder of the claim on the instant collateral security (which is the ground for recognition). [A] There is no dispute, the court below held that the Plaintiff had the right to receive the remainder of the claim on the instant collateral security (which is the ground for recognition), the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and 10, and the purport of the entire pleadings.