1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

In order to secure loan claims against Nonparty C, the Defendant registered the establishment of a neighboring mortgage of KRW 363,60,000 on October 18, 201, the maximum debt amount of KRW 1004,404, and KRW 404 (hereinafter “instant real property”).

On July 25, 2014, the Defendant’s application for voluntary auction based on the instant right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) commenced the procedure of voluntary auction to the court B.

During the instant auction procedure, the Plaintiff filed a report on the right and demand for distribution by asserting that he/she is a lessee with respect to one column among the real estate in this case.

On the date of distribution conducted on March 27, 2015, this Court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that the Defendant distributes KRW 286,022,414 to the Defendant and exclude the Plaintiff from the distribution of dividends.

On the date of distribution, the Plaintiff raised an objection against KRW 22,00,000 out of the amount of distribution to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] The plaintiff asserts that the right of preferential repayment should be recognized as a lessee with the genuine lessee who rents one column of the real estate in this case, as a small lessee, in light of the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that a lease agreement between the Plaintiff and C was concluded for the purpose of using and gaining profit from one column of the instant real estate, rather than for the Plaintiff’s purpose of using and gaining profit from one column of the instant real estate, with the protection of small-sum lessee, with the intention of receiving a preferential dividend rather than for the secured party.

① Around October 6, 2011, Nonparty E resided in the instant real estate in KRW 100 million from C, and was demanded by C to increase the lease deposit in KRW 30 million, and the Plaintiff had the Plaintiff enter into the instant lease agreement with respect to KRW 31 million with respect to KRW 1 column among the instant real estate.

However, the lease deposit shall be paid E.