1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Under Article 102, 304, 102, 304 (hereinafter “instant real estate for convenience”) of the building E-Gun, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Busan-gun, which was registered under D’s name on October 6, 201, a creditor who completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage with D as the debtor, and on October 10, 201, the registration of the decision on commencement of voluntary auction was completed on the same day after having received the decision on commencement of construction of the said real estate C from the court.

B. Since then, the auction procedure for the above real estate was in progress, and on June 24, 2014, the auction court opened a date of distribution, and prepared a distribution schedule for each distribution of KRW 91,576,581 to the defendant, who is the person holding the provisional registration, and the defendant, who is the person holding the right to make a provisional registration, who is the applicant for a right to collateral security and the applicant for a claim

C. On the other hand, on April 20, 2012, the Plaintiff, who completed the registration of provisional disposition on the prohibition of disposal of the instant real estate on the date of distribution with the right to claim the cancellation of the registration of ownership transfer, was present on the said date of distribution and stated an objection against the Defendant’s dividend, and filed the instant lawsuit on June 30, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion real estate is registered under the name of D, it was newly constructed with the Plaintiff’s cost and effort, and thus, it is the actual ownership of the Plaintiff.

However, the above provisional registration is null and void because the defendant knew of such fact and made a provisional registration, and therefore, the distribution of dividends to the defendant is erroneous.

B. The provisional disposition authority against the auction real estate does not constitute an interested party under Article 90 of the Civil Execution Act (see Supreme Court Order 94Ma1534, Sept. 30, 1994). Furthermore, a person who is standing to sue a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution was present on the date of distribution and raised an objection under the substantive law as to the distribution schedule, and the third party is limited to the creditor or debtor, and even in case where the third party's property was mistakenly owned by the debtor and thus adjudicated as the subject matter of compulsory execution, such