1. It was prepared on November 26, 2015 by the said court with respect to the case of the voluntary auction of real estate C in Sung-nam Branch of Suwon District Court.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 7, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on April 29, 2013 with respect to D Apartment Nos. 101-404 (hereinafter “instant real estate”). On the same day, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate with respect to the establishment of a mortgage with respect to the Plaintiff, the mortgagee, the Saemaul Depository, the Dong-mortgage, and the maximum debt amount of KRW 372,00,000.

B. The Dong-in Saemaul Depository applied for a voluntary auction at Sungwon District Court's Sung-nam branch, and the above court (C) rendered a decision to voluntarily commence the auction on June 2, 2014, and Nonparty E was awarded a successful bid on October 21, 2015 in the above auction procedure.

(hereinafter “instant auction”). C.

On November 26, 2015, the above court prepared a distribution schedule as indicated below with respect to the auction of this case. On November 26, 2015, the Plaintiff, an obligor and owner, appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the whole amount of the Defendant’s dividends.

The creditor B: (a) the amount of the community credit cooperative, Dong-dong, Seoul, Hanam-si, 22,00,000 won 514,480 won 422,010,880 won 123 in the order of dividends of KRW 122,00,000,000 in the amount of dividends of KRW 514,480 won in the amount of dividends of KRW 280,126,930 in the amount of dividends of KRW 123 in the order of dividends of KRW 22,00,00 in the amount of claims of the creditor

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In full view of the overall purport of pleadings in the statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff did not have a direct lease contract with the defendant. Unless there are special circumstances, the defendant is not entitled to receive a dividend as a small lessee.

B. The Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant is that Nonparty F shall receive KRW 134 million in total from Nonparty G, and the Defendant shall receive KRW 30 million from F. However, G upon delegation from the Plaintiff of all of its authority regarding the instant real estate, entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant in lieu of performing its obligations to F. The lease deposit is the same.