1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 15, 2010, with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list owned by D (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the Gangwon Credit Union established the right to collateral security on the collateral security on the attached list (hereinafter “mortgage”), but the Gangwon Credit Union applied for the auction of the right to collateral security, and the said court decided to commence the auction on December 31, 2014.

The plaintiff acquired the secured debt of the above secured debt through the corporation of U.N. L.I.D.

B. Meanwhile, on December 5, 2012, the Defendant concluded a lease contract (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with a deposit of KRW 26,000,000 with respect to the instant real estate, and completed a move-in report on December 17, 2012 and possessed the instant real estate from the 19th day of the same month.

C. On October 20, 2015, this court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes KRW 22,00,000 to the Defendant, who demanded a distribution as a small lessee on the date of distribution, and to the Plaintiff, the applicant creditor and the mortgagee, the right to collateral security, respectively, in the order of priority 4, 53,305,757 (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

On October 23, 2015, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the whole amount of dividends to the Defendant on the date of distribution, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on October 23, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion argues to the effect that, around the other hand, the Plaintiff, who abused the provision on the preferential repayment of small amount deposit under the Housing Lease Protection Act as the most lessee who conspired with D or the person who abused the provision on the preferential repayment of small amount deposit under the Housing Lease Protection Act, constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, the instant lease agreement constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, it should be revoked and the entire dividend amount to the

B. We examine the determination of the primary claim No. 1.