1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On February 16, 2009, the Plaintiff established the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with respect to the Goyang-gu D apartment 501 Dong 1504 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) owned by Samyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, U.S., U.S., the maximum debt amount of which is KRW 66,00,000.

B. The Defendant, on September 19, 2014, completed the registration of the right to lease of the said real estate on October 6, 2014, subject to the order of lease registration under the Housing Lease Registration Order, which was issued as the 2014Kagla 1026, the Goyang-gu District Court Decision 2014.

C. On March 16, 2015, on the instant real estate, the Plaintiff filed an application for the commencement of voluntary auction to Goyang-gu District Court Goyang-do Branch B with respect to the instant real estate, and the auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). D.

On September 23, 2015, the court prepared a distribution schedule to the effect that the defendant shall preferentially pay KRW 40,000,000 to the defendant, and that the plaintiff shall distribute KRW 442,20,753 to the plaintiff, whichever is lower.

Accordingly, the plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the total amount of the defendant's dividend.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant is only the most lessee, and even if not, the plaintiff prepared a non-resident confirmation document to the effect that E registered as the defendant's husband and the householder did not have any lease relationship in the real estate of this case at the time of investigating the lease relationship with respect to the real estate of this case, but the defendant's demand for distribution in the auction procedure of this case shall not be permitted against the good faith principle, and the plaintiff who trusted the non-resident confirmation document prepared by E registered as the householder shall be protected. Thus, the distribution schedule of this case where the defendant recognized the defendant as the lessee as the fixed-date book and distributed the amount equivalent to the deposit amount to the plaintiff shall be distributed

3. Determination

A. Examination as to whether he is the most lessee, No. 1.