1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. In the separate sheet between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and B.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 29, 2012, B, with respect to the real estate (exclusive use area of 57.97 square meters, hereinafter “the instant apartment”) indicated in the separate sheet, owned by B, the Defendant completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage with the maximum debt amount of 29.1.2 million won, and on May 30, 2012, the Defendant provided loans at 8.8% per annum for interest and 20% per annum for delay.

B. On December 27, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with B to lease the instant apartment from January 16, 2013 to January 15, 2015, the deposit amount of KRW 26 million, monthly rent of KRW 200,000 (the monthly rent of KRW 2.4 million shall be paid in lump sum at the time of payment of the remainder of the monthly rent of KRW 1 year), and the Plaintiff entered into the said lease agreement with D through C to pay the remainder of the rent of KRW 2.4 million on December 16, 2013 and deposited KRW 5 million on December 27, 2012 with the account of D, the wife of the Plaintiff via C, as the wife of the Plaintiff, with the deposit of KRW 4 million on January 16, 2013 and KRW 800,000,000 on January 18, 2013.

C. B continued to pay interest on the above loan obligation against the Defendant, upon the Defendant’s application, the real estate auction procedure (Seoul Northern District Court E; hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) commenced on April 5, 2013 regarding the instant apartment, and the Plaintiff filed an application for a report on the right and a demand for distribution as the lessee, but was excluded from the distribution.

【Ground for recognition” without any dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 8-3, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 4-2, witness F's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On January 16, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a principal lawsuit, and as a small lessee who completed a move-in report on the instant apartment in accordance with the instant lease agreement, was excluded from the distribution of dividends in preference to the Defendant, who is a mortgagee, under the Housing Lease Protection Act, even though he/she had the right to be reimbursed KRW 26 million, which was the mortgagee, under the Housing Lease Protection Act. Therefore, the Defendant who received the dividend in the instant auction procedure