A. On February 3, 2009, D Union set the first priority collective security right to lend money to the debtor E, and to set the F Main Complex G (instant apartment) owned by E with the maximum debt amount of KRW 299,00,000,000. On November 30, 2017, D Union commenced the procedure of voluntary auction (instant auction) with respect to the instant apartment.

B. On December 28, 2017, the Plaintiff acquired the claim for the loan to E and completed the additional registration on the ground of the transfer of the finalized claim (the claim amounting to KRW 236,526,515 and interest for 16.818% from November 29, 2017 on KRW 230,000,00 among them) from D Association.

C. During the instant voluntary auction procedure, Defendant B, January 23, 2018, and January 30, 2018, Defendant B, and February 1, 2018, the I reported the distribution and right to a small amount of lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act, and H submitted the written withdrawal on June 12, 2018.

The apartment of this case was sold on July 11, 2018, and on October 24, 2018, the auction court prepared a distribution schedule with respect to the apartment sale price of this case on October 24, 2018, and prepared a distribution schedule with the content that the Defendant distributes KRW 14,00,000 to the Plaintiff, a mortgagee, KRW 34,767,477 (the remaining amount, KRW 374,875,477, the maximum debt amount, KRW 299,00,000) in the first order under the Housing Lease Protection Act, on the premise that the Defendant is a small lessee under the said Act. The auction court was excluded from the distribution of dividends.

E. The Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and raised an objection to the whole amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit within seven days thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant was the small lessee for the purpose of collecting the claim, and the defendant, instead of paying the existing loan, concluded a lease contract with the apartment of this case and had the debtor reside in the Han Kin.