1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The fact that there is no dispute over the basic facts [based for recognition], each entry of Gap evidence 2 through 6, and 9 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings;

A. On December 27, 2012, the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives concluded a mortgage contract with respect to D’s land and its ground buildings owned by C (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”). On December 27, 2012, the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives concluded a mortgage contract with respect to only the instant building (hereinafter “instant building”). On the same day, the National Federation completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage with respect to the maximum debt amount of KRW 345.6 million.

B. The National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives applied for the auction of real estate based on the above collateral security, and on March 11, 2015, on each of the instant real estate, the registration of the decision to commence the auction of real estate was completed on March 11, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant auction”). C.

The plaintiff was the transferee of the above-mortgaged claim by the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives and participated in the auction procedure of this case as the successor of the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives.

The Defendant completed a move-in report on March 9, 2015 with respect to the third floor of the instant building, and received a fixed date on April 14, 2015 and made a demand for distribution in the instant auction procedure on the same day.

E. On the date of distribution of the instant auction (on March 15, 2016), the distribution schedule was prepared to distribute KRW 14 million to the Defendant as a lessee of the third floor of the instant building, and KRW 259,759,552 to the Plaintiff as the applicant obligee. On the grounds that the Plaintiff was not a genuine small lessee, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the Defendant on March 22, 2016, and filed the instant lawsuit on March 22, 2016.

2. The parties' assertion

A. Since the third floor of the building of this case alleged by the plaintiff is not a residential building, the Housing Lease Protection Act cannot be applied. The defendant, as the former husband of C, who is the owner of the real estate of this case, prepares a false lease contract for the purpose of receiving dividends from the auction of this case as a small lessee.