1. With respect to the Incheon District Court C’s compulsory auction and D(Dual) auction of real estate, the above court on April 11, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 7, 201, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage with the maximum debt amount of KRW 110,500,000,000, regarding the instant Nos. 301 and 302, owned by the said company, in order to secure the claim for loans to E.

B. On October 5, 2012, Defendant A entered into a lease agreement between E and E with respect to the instant subparagraph 302 with the lease deposit of KRW 25 million and the period from October 5, 2012 to October 4, 2013, and completed the move-in report on October 19, 2012.

C. As between September 25, 2012 and E, Defendant B entered into a lease agreement between the lease deposit amount of KRW 40 million with respect to the instant subparagraph 301 and the period from October 16, 2012 to October 16, 2014, and completed the move-in report on October 18, 2012 and obtained the fixed date.

G applied for a compulsory auction of real estate to the Incheon District Court C on December 31, 2012 with respect to individual households of F apartment including the instant Nos. 301 and 302, G, and thereafter, applied for a compulsory auction of real estate on December 31, 2012, and thereafter, the Plaintiff applied for a compulsory auction of real estate on February 5, 2013.

E. The Defendants asserted that they are small-sum tenants under Article 8 of the Housing Lease Protection Act in the auction procedure, and filed a report on rights and demand for distribution.

F. On the date of distribution implemented on April 11, 2014, the executing court prepared a distribution schedule that distributes the amount of KRW 42,113,580 to the president of the Korea Workers’ Compensation & Welfare Service, who is a wage creditor, to the president of the Korea Workers’ Compensation and Welfare Service, and to the Defendants, who is a small lessee, and H, and I, to each of the 14 million won, and to the Defendant, who is a mortgagee, to the Defendant.

G. On April 16, 2014, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the entire dividend amount of the Defendants on the date of distribution, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on April 16, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendants preferentially distribute the small amount of deposit under the Housing Lease Protection Act.