1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 10, 2010, the Plaintiff leased interest rate of 6.19% (based on the rate of 3.79%) to Nonparty C, and KRW 113 million, subject to the terms of December 10, 2014 on the repayment date, to Nonparty C, and completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage of KRW 146.9 million with respect to the D Building 301 (hereinafter “instant building”), which is his/her ownership, Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On November 24, 2013, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement between C and the instant building with respect to a lease deposit of KRW 29 million, and the lease agreement between December 10, 2013 and December 9, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) and obtained a fixed date after filing a move-in report on December 10, 201 of the same year.

C. Around January 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction of the instant building as the collateral security right holder, and on February 11, 2014, the Seoul Southern District Court rendered a decision to commence the auction of B real estate on February 11, 2014.

On the other hand, on March 25, 2014, the Defendant filed a report on the right and filed an application for demand for distribution with the deposit amount of KRW 29 million.

On November 20, 2014, the auction court: (a) deemed the Defendant as a small lessee and prepared a distribution schedule of KRW 25 million out of the claim amount of KRW 29 million; (b) the remaining dividend amount of KRW 103,552,087, excluding the pertinent tax, was distributed to the Plaintiff; (c) the Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned distribution date and raised an objection against the whole amount of the said dividend amount; and (d) filed the instant lawsuit on November 26, 201, within one week thereafter.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts that there is no dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant in collusion with C to receive the preferred small-sum deposit by using the protection system for small-sum lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act, and thus, the Plaintiff is the most lessee who drafted the instant lease agreement. Therefore, the Plaintiff asserts that the distribution schedule of KRW 25 million distributed to the Defendant ought to be revised in terms of KRW 128,552,087.

B. The defendant