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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. On September 25, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage, which is the debtor, C, and the plaintiff of the right to collateral security, with respect to D apartment 106, 204, 204 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) owned by C on September 25, 2009.

B. After that, upon the Plaintiff’s request, the decision to commence voluntary auction on the instant apartment was rendered to the District Court B, and the subsequent auction procedure was conducted (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). In the process, on August 19, 2013, the Defendant asserted that the lease deposit exists between himself and C with respect to the instant apartment as of September 10, 201 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”). The Defendant asserted that the lease contract between himself and C was established as of September 10, 201, with respect to the instant apartment as of KRW 40 million.

C. On the other hand, on January 24, 2014, the date of distribution of the instant auction procedure, the said auction court: (a) deemed the Defendant as a small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act; and (b) drafted a distribution schedule with the content that distributes the amount of KRW 14 million (84.72%) to the Plaintiff, the applicant creditor and the mortgagee, in the order of priority; and (c) made a distribution schedule with the content that distributes the amount of KRW 122,027,573 (84.72%) in the order of priority; (d) the Plaintiff stated an objection against the entire amount of distribution to the Defendant on the date of distribution; and (e) filed the instant lawsuit on January 29, 2014, within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, significant facts, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. Under the premise that the instant lease contract was duly established between the Defendant and C in the instant auction procedure, and the deposit for lease was duly accepted, the Defendant, who is the lessee of the instant apartment, was partly apportioned the lease deposit amount of KRW 14 million. However, the Defendant, as the mother money of C, is a false lease agreement that was concluded in collusion with him.