1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of correction shall be revoked.

1. As to this part of the basic facts, the corresponding part of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a false claim seeking evasion of the Plaintiff’s compulsory execution of the amount of KRW 97,00,000, out of KRW 163,500,000, which the Defendant reported as the secured claim of the instant provisional registration security right.

Even if the fee claim is not false, the party to the delegation contract is not the defendant but the law firm I, so it cannot be said that the fee claim belongs to the defendant.

In addition, delegation contracts concluded after provisional registration and delegation fees claims based on delegation contracts that are not parties to D should be excluded from secured claims.

Therefore, the distribution schedule prepared by the above court on October 18, 2016 with respect to the case of the compulsory auction of real estate C in Seoul Central District Court (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) shall be corrected as KRW 66,50,00,00, which is the amount of the loan to the Defendant, and the remaining amount of KRW 73,96,997, which is the amount of the loan to the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant's assertion that the defendant actually performed agency work according to the delegation contract with D, and the defendant, as the representative attorney of I law firm, is the defendant's individual revenue within the law firm, so the defendant is also the creditor of the claim for fees.

Since the Defendant and D agreed to include both the claim for fees already incurred at the time of the establishment of the provisional registration security right of this case as well as the claim for fees to be incurred in the future in the secured claim, the amount of dividends against the Defendant is justifiable.

3. Determination

A. In the event that a mortgage is created by providing real estate owned by an obligor as security for the purpose of securing the claim related to the delegation fee claim, in principle, the claim and the mortgage can not be different in light of the doctrine of accessory of the security right.