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

A. On March 7, 2013, the Plaintiff, while lending KRW 75,00,000 to C, was set up a collateral security in accordance with subparagraph 2 of the Mangyang-gu Dalllle Underground Floor (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On December 14, 2013, the Defendant concluded a lease contract with her husband E who represented C, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 40,000,000, and the lease term from December 21, 2013 to December 20, 2015. The Defendant completed the move-in report on December 20, 2013 and received the fixed date.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). C.

C In arrears with the payment of the loan to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff filed an application for the auction of real estate rent B with the Suwon District Court, which was based on the right to collateral security, on April 29, 2014, and the auction procedure for the instant real estate was commenced on April 29, 2014, and the Defendant filed a report on the right and demand for distribution by asserting that it is a small lessee

On March 2, 2015, a court of execution prepared a distribution schedule stating that the Defendant, who made a demand for distribution as a small lessee, by opening a date of distribution, shall distribute KRW 22,00,000 to the Defendant, who made a demand for distribution, and 64,43,268 to the Plaintiff, who is the creditor and the right to collateral security.

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and raised an objection to the total amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on March 6, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The instant lease agreement is null and void, as the Plaintiff’s assertion C did not grant the right of representation to husband E in relation to the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, and the scope of the right of representation for daily home affairs exceeds the scope of the right of representation.

Therefore, it should be corrected that the dividend amount to the defendant should be deleted from the distribution schedule of this case and that the dividend amount should be distributed to the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion is within the scope of the right of temporary residence and E is entitled to conclude the instant lease agreement.