1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the judgment of the District Court J, K (Joint), and the judgment of the court of first instance drawn up on February 28, 2012 in the auction of real estate.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination on the plaintiffs' claims against the defendant

A. The summary of the parties' assertion 1) In the case of a mortgagee who makes an application for voluntary auction of the gist of the plaintiffs' claim, the claims should accrue until the time of the application for auction, and in the case of a creditor who makes a demand for distribution, the claims should be established by the time of the completion of the request for distribution. However, since the sales contract of the defendant as to part of L forest after division becomes impossible only when the successful bidder pays the proceeds of sale, the defendant cannot be deemed to have established until the time of the defendant's request for auction or demand for distribution. As such, the defendant's claim for compensatory damages due to nonperformance of the above sales contract, which claims secured by the 13th priority mortgage, cannot be deemed to have been made by the time of the execution of the above claim in the auction procedure of this case. In addition, since the defendant purchased part of L forest after division from Y, the defendant's claim against Y does not exist more than 300,000,000 won after the division, the defendant's claim for compensatory damages and the part of the above claim should be deleted.

Therefore, based on the 13th priority mortgage, the Defendant received dividends from the 7th priority order in the instant distribution schedule based on the instant 400,000.