1. As to the voluntary auction case E of the Incheon District Court, the above court against Defendant C in the dividend table prepared on July 3, 2015.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff, on March 15, 2013, completed the establishment registration of a mortgage over KRW 150 million with respect to the land (hereinafter “instant land”). On February 28, 2014, the Plaintiff was issued a provisional attachment order of KRW 201, 202, 301, 401, 402, and 502 (hereinafter “instant building”) with respect to the instant building on the ground of the instant land, Incheon District Court 2014Kahap331 regarding the instant building.

On September 1, 2014, the Incheon District Court rendered a ruling to commence the auction of this case on September 1, 2014, upon the motion of H and I, the mortgagee of the right to collateral security regarding the land and building of this case for which the defendant's demand for distribution was made.

(2) The Defendants filed a report on the right and demand for distribution against the lessee of the instant building during the instant auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).

On the date of distribution implemented on July 3, 2015, the lower court: (a) distributed dividends of KRW 25 million to Defendant D; (b) KRW 24 million to Defendant C; and (c) KRW 22 million to Defendant B; and (d) drafted a distribution schedule that distributes dividends of KRW 53,773,315 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

On July 10, 2015, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the entire amount of dividends to the Defendants on the date of distribution, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on July 10, 2015.

【In light of the fact that there is no dispute, the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and all pleadings, and the Plaintiff’s assertion of the judgment, there are circumstances to suspect the time when the Defendants entered into a lease agreement, the amount of lease deposit, the circumstance leading up to the conclusion of the contract, etc., and it is not clear that the Defendants were residing in the real estate of this case, the Defendants constitute the most lessee.