A. C, on February 8, 2010, set up a right to collateral security, which is the maximum debt amount 241,200,000, with respect to the 202nd floor (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of the 4301st floor (Dai-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu) (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On September 26, 2013, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement between C and the instant real estate with a deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000 from October 2, 2013 to October 1, 2015 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”), and paid the said deposit by transferring it to the account of C, and simultaneously completed the move-in report to the location of the instant real estate at the same time with the instant lease agreement having obtained a fixed date.

C. Prior to this, on September 17, 2013, Industrial Complex Loan Co., Ltd. executed a provisional attachment of KRW 4,220,051 on the instant real estate on the claim amounting to KRW 4,220,051, and thereafter, on October 30, 2013, the Plaintiff received a decision to voluntarily commence the auction on the instant real estate from Suwon District Court B on the basis of the said mortgage and completed the registration of entry.

In distributing the proceeds of sale on October 16, 2014, the Suwon District Court prepared a distribution schedule to distribute the amount of KRW 14,00,000 to the Defendant, who is the lessee of the small amount, KRW 59,960, and KRW 230,048,921 to the Plaintiff, who is the holder of the right to deliver the pertinent tax, and the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff raised an objection against KRW 11,151,079, out of the amount of dividends to the Defendant on the said date of distribution, and filed the instant lawsuit.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap 1, 3, 6, Eul 1 through 4, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the facts without dispute

2. The plaintiff ex officio determination is sought to correct the distribution schedule for an amount exceeding 11,151,079 won out of the dividend amount against the defendant on the date of distribution. This part of the lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

3. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant is a small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act and in collusion with C, who is a lessor, for the purpose of receiving prior dividends.