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

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) and D are Goyang-dong E Apartment-gu, Busan-gu.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The summary of the plaintiff's assertion is a small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act who entered into a lease contract with D on the apartment of this case, and 22,000,000 won out of the lease deposit should be distributed preferentially. Thus, the distribution schedule of this case should be revised as stated in the purport of the claim. 2) The plaintiff's summary of the defendant's assertion is the largest lessee, and the lease contract of this case should be revoked as a fraudulent act. Thus, the plaintiff cannot be distributed preferentially as a small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act.

The instant lease agreement constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the general creditor of D, and thus, seeks revocation as the instant counterclaim.

B. First, we examine whether the instant lease agreement constitutes a fraudulent act and thus ought to be revoked.

1. The right of priority repayment of small-sum deposit under Article 8 of the Housing Lease Protection Act provides a kind of statutory security right that can be paid in preference to claims secured by mortgages and taxes on the leased house. Therefore, the debtor's act of setting the right of lease under the above Article on the only house owned by the debtor in excess of debt is an act that causes a decrease in the debtor's whole property as a security in excess of debt, and therefore the act of establishing the right of lease is subject to revocation of fraudulent act.

On the other hand, the debtor's bad faith is presumed and the tenant's bad faith is also presumed, but it takes precedence over the tenant who satisfies the requirements prescribed in the above Article.