1. Of the dividend table prepared on March 11, 2014 by the above court with respect to the auction of the real estate B in Incheon District Court.

1. Basic facts

A. In order to secure a debt of KRW 107,00,000 against C, the Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of a mortgage over the instant real estate owned by C on December 9, 2010, consisting of the maximum debt amount of KRW 139,100,000.

(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). B.

Since then, C did not pay interest on the above loan obligation, the Plaintiff filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate concerning the instant real estate with the Incheon District Court B on September 16, 2013, and received a voluntary decision to commence auction from the above court.

(hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). C.

During the auction procedure of this case, the defendant himself paid 23.5 million won to the court of execution for the real estate of this case from C and claimed that he is the lessee who leased the real estate of this case, and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution.

In distributing the amount of KRW 117,770,109 to be actually distributed on the date of distribution made on March 11, 2014, the court of execution prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that distributes the amount of KRW 22,00,00 to the Defendant who applied for a demand for distribution as a small lessee, and KRW 136,220 to Dong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Incheon Metropolitan City, which is the holder of the right to deliver, and KRW 136,220 to the Plaintiff who is the holder of the right to deliver, and KRW 95,63,89 to the Plaintiff who is the

E. Accordingly, on the aforementioned date of distribution, the Plaintiff raised an objection to the entire amount of distribution to the Defendant, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on March 14, 2014, within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries in Gap's 1 or 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The court of execution is not the most lessee who entered into a false rental agreement or the legitimate lessee who is entitled to receive protection under the Housing Lease Protection Act, in collusion with C to receive a small-sum lease deposit under the Housing Lease Protection Act, and thus, the court of execution is the defendant.