1. All of the main and ancillary claims of this case are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a creditor who, on November 17, 2015, a notary public holds a claim of KRW 2.21 billion against Nonparty 2,216,000,000 against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) in accordance with the notarial deed on the face of this legal entity.

B. The non-party company submitted a claim statement of KRW 1,091,906,752 as a mortgagee of the right to collateral security at the auction procedure for Goyang-dong District Court A, but around December 1, 2015, the non-party company prepared and submitted a written consent on the receipt of dividends to the Defendant, who is the pledgee of the right to receive dividends.

C. In the above auction procedure, on December 10, 2015, the said court drafted a distribution schedule to the Defendant, who is the pledgee of the right to collateral security, to distribute KRW 184,351,636 to the Defendant.

Accordingly, the plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the total amount of the defendant's dividend.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant asserts to the effect that the plaintiff is not a creditor of the auction procedure of this case, and thus, the plaintiff is not entitled to raise an objection to the distribution.

However, in full view of the purport of the whole pleadings in the statement No. 4, the plaintiff was present on the date of distribution as a collection right holder against the non-party company and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution. Therefore, the defendant's defense is without merit.

3. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that although the defendant did not have the right to receive dividends from the non-party company, the defendant prepared a written consent on the receipt of dividends to the defendant against the will of the non-party company and submitted it to the above auction court, it asserted that this is a fraudulent act against the plaintiff and that the dividend distributed to the defendant should be distributed

B. First of all, as to whether the Defendant forged the written consent to the receipt of the dividends of the non-party company without the consent of the non-party company.