1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On July 25, 2012, in order to secure a loan claim of KRW 65 million against the Plaintiff, the Defendant entered into a mortgage agreement with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff regarding the maximum debt amount of KRW 97,500,000,000 with respect to the land, other than Hongcheon-gun D (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Plaintiff, and completed the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage on the same day.

(hereinafter “The instant mortgage”). On July 26, 2012, the Plaintiff drafted and concluded an agreement on the loan repayment with the Defendant stating that “The Plaintiff shall receive KRW 65 million as the owner of the instant real estate and borrow it, and the loan amount shall be paid KRW 19,50,000,000 to the principal by the 3% interest per month prior to the 25% interest per month.”

B. The commencement of the discretionary auction procedure and the preparation of a distribution schedule for the instant real estate E filed an application for the voluntary auction of the instant real estate and the commencement of the voluntary auction procedure to B of this court. After that, the Daejeon Western Saemaul Depository filed an application for the voluntary auction of the instant real estate and the overlapping auction procedure to C of this court.

In the above auction procedure on December 4, 2017, this court prepared a distribution schedule stating that the Defendant, who is the right to collateral security of this case, distributes the amount of KRW 97.5 million to the Defendant as the right to collateral security of this case.

The plaintiff raised an objection against the amount of distribution to the defendant on the date of distribution.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul 6, 7, 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On June 17, 2016, the Defendant asserted that the instant real estate was subject to the instant right to collateral security, and agreed to receive KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff and withdrawn the application for voluntary auction.

Since the secured claim of the instant right to collateral security has ceased to exist, the amount distributed to the Defendant as the mortgagee of the instant case shall be deleted.

3. In a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution, the burden of proving the grounds for objection against distribution is common.