1. Of the distribution schedule prepared on December 30, 2013 by the above court regarding the Seoul Northern District Court B real estate auction case.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 12, 2013, the procedure of the auction of real estate was initiated on April 12, 2013 by the Seoul Northern District Court B, upon the application of the Defendant, who is the mortgagee, with respect to the land E-Ba No. 501 of the five stories (hereinafter “instant loan”).

B. During the above auction procedure, the execution court distributed the amount of KRW 134,417,794, which is to be actually distributed after deducting the execution cost from the proceeds and interest of the building of this case, and the amount of KRW 355,250, and the amount of KRW 250, and the amount of KRW 134,04,00, which is to be distributed to the Defendant, who is the senior mortgagee, in the Seoul Southernbuk-gu in the order of priority, in the order of priority 18,540, and KRW 134,04,00,000

C. On December 30, 2013, the Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the Defendant regarding KRW 25 million out of the dividend amount.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry in Gap's 1 or 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with C’s agent F and G on the instant loan, and paid the lease deposit to F and G with the consent of C, and the Plaintiff entered into the H and lease agreement delegated by C after moving-in.

Since it is a small lessee who actually resided in the Housing Lease Protection Act since then, the small amount of deposit under the Housing Lease Protection Act should be distributed first.

B. Defendant 1) In light of the following: (a) Defendant 1 conspired with false representation (a) (a person who enters into a lease contract with a family head lessee G and who is not an owner) and remitted the lease deposit amount of KRW 25 million to G et al., the Plaintiff’s assertion is difficult to obtain; (b) the power of representation has not been confirmed through the power of attorney from G or H; (c) the lease deposit was considerably less than the market price; and (d) the lease deposit was registered as a collateral security and provisional attachment above the market price at the time of the Plaintiff’s lease