1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 30, 2015, upon the Plaintiff’s request, who was a mortgagee, the right to file a report on the right and demand for distribution against KRW 22,00,000,00 of the lease deposit on January 18, 2016, the Defendant filed an application with the Incheon District Court for a decision to commence the auction of real estate on December 30, 2015.

B. In the above real estate auction, on October 12, 2016, the above court drafted a distribution schedule with the content of allocating KRW 22,00,000 to the Defendant, who is the lessee of small amount, and KRW 36,176,403 to the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff raised an objection to the total amount of the Defendant’s dividends.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On March 5, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant leased the instant house from C to KRW 22,00,000 (a down payment of KRW 22,00,000, the remainder of KRW 20,000,00, and KRW 200,000) (hereinafter “the instant lease”). Considering that the location of the F Licensed Real Estate Agent Office (U.S., Nam-gu) where the instant lease agreement was made is located is not located in the Defendant’s domicile (S., Nam-gu, Seoul), not in the address of C (Seoul), but in the location of the instant house, there is no doubt about its preparation. ② The date of the remainder payment is omitted, ③ The lessee’s seal affixed on the instant lease agreement and the receipt of the deposit for lease is not the first priority for the lessee’s use and profit-making and profit-making, but the first priority for the lessee’s main purpose of the Housing Lease Protection Act.