Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. Defendant B, the mortgagee of G Apartment-dong I (hereinafter “instant apartment”) located in Gyeyang-gu, Incheon, the Plaintiff’s head, filed a voluntary request for auction regarding the instant apartment. On July 10, 2019, the court rendered a decision to commence an auction and the auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).

B. In the instant auction procedure, the Plaintiff filed a report on the right and the demand for distribution, alleging that “the instant apartment was leased from E to KRW 100 million as the leased deposit amount,” in the instant auction procedure.

(c)

On August 21, 2020, a date when the distribution was made, the execution court prepared a distribution list with the content that distributes KRW 180,598,837 to the defendant Korea Asset Management Corporation, who is a neighboring mortgagee, after determining the amount of actual distribution of KRW 227,214,232, which deducts the execution cost, etc. from the sale price of the apartment of this case, from the sale price of the apartment of this case, and distributed KRW 46,615,395 to the defendant B.

(d)

The Plaintiff appeared on the dividend date and raised an objection against the total amount of the dividends of Defendant B to KRW 53,384,605, among the dividend amount of Defendant Korea Asset Management Corporation, and filed the instant lawsuit on August 25, 2020.

【Fact- without dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful inasmuch as the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with E on November 10, 201 with respect to the instant apartment, and paid all KRW 100 million as the lease deposit was paid to the Plaintiff on November 17, 2011, and the Plaintiff was also granted to the person who became final and conclusive on November 17, 2011.

B. The lessee is entitled to receive the rent deposit, even though the lessee did not receive the delivery of an apartment house in collusion with the related legal doctrine or the lessee did not receive the delivery of the apartment.