1. Of the distribution schedule prepared on June 18, 2019 by the said court with respect to the case of application for the voluntary auction of real estate C in the Suwon District Court.

Basic Facts

[Ground for recognition: The fact that there is no dispute, the entries in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings] On January 10, 2016, the plaintiff entered into a contract with the Securities and Exchange Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "Non-Party Co., Ltd") to sell the land of which KRW 592.1 square meters and KRW 592.1 square meters (hereinafter "the land of this case") to the non-party Co., Ltd., and received KRW 2.3 billion out of the above price from the non-party Co., Ltd. on February 26, 2016.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s remaining claims = 90 million won = 3.2 billion won - 2.3 billion won as the preserved right, and the provisional attachment registration was completed on December 15, 2017.

On May 3, 2018, Nonparty Company concluded a mortgage agreement (hereinafter “instant agreement”) on May 2, 2018 with the Defendant regarding the instant land on May 3, 2018, and established the right to collateral security of KRW 650,000,000 for the Defendant.

On June 18, 2019, the distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) in which dividends amounting to KRW 3,287,89,114, which is to be actually distributed on the date of distribution was prepared by the Suwon District Court’s voluntary auction procedure, upon the application of the G, which is a mortgagee for the instant land, was in progress.

The grounds for the dividend priority creditor's dividend amount of KRW 13,813,730 (the relevant tax) 2H limited liability company (the transferor): 391,880 won, the mortgagee 391,880 won, the mortgagee 488,575,351 provisional attachment right (the relevant non-tax) of KRW 354,323,102, the collective security right holder of KRW 3,287,89,114, was present on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the Defendant on June 19, 2019.

The plaintiff asserts that since the contract of this case is invalid as a false declaration of agreement, the total amount of the defendant's dividends should be distributed to the plaintiff.

On the other hand, the defendant is against the plaintiff.