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

A. On March 27, 1994, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract with 25,00,000 won (the deposit amount of November 27, 1997 shall be increased to 27,000,000 won) among 4,00,000 Dong-dong 4, Seoul ○○○-ro, 237-O, and 302 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”). On April 28, 1994, the Plaintiff entered into a move-in report on resident registration and obtained the fixed date of lease contract on May 15, 1998. After the Plaintiff’s family members repeated their moving-in from the instant building on resident registration, and from September 26, 2002 to October 8, 202, both the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s family members were transferred from the instant building.

B. On November 9, 1998, the Defendant registered the establishment of a neighboring building with a maximum debt amount of KRW 140,000,000 on the land of the instant building, ○○○-ro, Seoul 4, 237-○, 115.7 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

C. The defendant has 160,391,590 won, totaling four tax claims from June 1, 200 to September 1, 2001, which are the owner of the land of this case.

D. The instant land was conducted with the Seoul Southern District Court No. 2007 another 24760 upon the Plaintiff’s application for a compulsory auction by official auction.

E. The Seoul Southern District Court distributed the amount of KRW 353,916,768, which is to be actually distributed on June 30, 2008, 12,00,000, in the first order, the amount of KRW 353,916,768, and the amount of KRW 12,00,00,000, to the ○○○, the Plaintiff, the last order of the Plaintiff, the last ○, the last ○○, the last ○○, the last ○, the last ○○ and the last ○○, the seizure authority (the pertinent tax) shall be the second order, and KRW 6,743,150,00, to the last ○, the lessee of the fixed date, the third order, and KRW 12,00,00,000 to the last ○, the lessee of the fixed date, and KRW 15,00,000,00 to the Republic of Korea (the attachment authority).

F. The Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and raised an objection against the distribution amount of KRW 8,743,675 out of the dividend amount of Defendant Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office and KRW 6,256,325 out of the dividend amount of Defendant Republic of Korea, and filed the instant lawsuit on July 2, 2008.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without any dispute, Gap 1 to 8, Eul 1 to 3, Eul 1 to 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that the preferential repayment should be made on the basis of the date of initial moving into the building of this case and the fixed date under the lease agreement. In order to obtain preferential repayment under the Housing Lease Protection Act, the plaintiff must meet the requirements for setting up against the plaintiff such as delivery of housing and resident registration under the Housing Lease Protection Act. The plaintiff has lost the requirements for setting up against the plaintiff by moving his resident registration from September 26, 2002 to October 8, 2002, and even if he again satisfies the opposing power, the plaintiff cannot be paid preferentially to the defendants since he is lower than the defendants. Accordingly, the plaintiff's assertion contrary to this is without merit.

B. The plaintiff asserts that the defendants suffered unjust enrichment due to the extinguishment of his opposing power, so it cannot be viewed as unjust enrichment by the defendant as to the extinguishment of his opposing power. Therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is rejected as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.