2. The third floor of Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Apartment 101, 3.

A. On September 24, 2009, the Plaintiff lent KRW 165 million to B on September 24, 2009, and completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on the third floor No. 301, 101, 301, 301 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. Since then, the Plaintiff filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate on the instant real estate with Seoul Northern District Court D based on the foregoing collateral security, and the said court rendered a voluntary decision to commence the auction on April 7, 2014.

(hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). C.

The Defendant asserted that the instant real estate was the lessee who paid the deposit amount of KRW 26 million during the instant auction procedure, and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution.

On November 26, 2014, the execution court prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that distributes the amount of KRW 180,587,347 to the Plaintiff, who is the applicant creditor and the mortgagee, as well as the mortgagee, in the first order of the Defendant who demanded a distribution as a small lessee on the date of distribution.

E. Accordingly, on the aforementioned date of distribution, the Plaintiff raised an objection to the entire amount of distribution to the Defendant, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on November 28, 2014, within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 5, 6, 23 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the most lessee who in collusion with B to receive a small amount of lease deposit under the Housing Lease Protection Act, and entered into a lease agreement on the instant real estate.

Even if the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with B and actually resided in the instant real estate, it is not the primary purpose of the lease agreement, but the primary purpose of the lease agreement is to recover the claim prior to the prior mortgagee’s protection. Therefore, the Defendant is a small-sum lessee who has preferential right to payment.