1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C (hereinafter “C”) and D, etc., who are its representative director, with Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014Ga232060, and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for the claim for reimbursement. On October 10, 2014, the said court rendered a judgment that “C and D jointly paid KRW 875,720,921 to the Plaintiff, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 1, 2014.

On February 3, 2014, before the filing of the lawsuit, the Plaintiff completed the registration of provisional seizure with the claim amounting to KRW 100 million in relation to the 103 Dong Dong-gu, Seogu, Daegu apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) owned by D on February 3, 2014.

On May 23, 2014, at the request of the National Bank of Korea, Co., Ltd., a collateral security right holder, the apartment of this case, the procedure of the auction of real estate rent was initiated as the Seo-gu District Court Branch B.

From August 4, 2013, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement between D and D on the premise that one of the instant apartment units would have completed the move-in report (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”) and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution.

On February 9, 2015, the auction court prepared a distribution schedule that distributes the amount of KRW 120,29,111 in the first order to the National Bank of Korea, the applicant creditor, and KRW 20,000 in the second order to the defendant, the small lessee, and KRW 150,312,646 in the Nam Daegu Tax Office, the seizure authority, to the defendant, the small lessee.

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and raised an objection to the whole amount of dividends of the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on February 13, 2015, which was within one week thereafter.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 9, Gap evidence Nos. 5-1 and 5-2, assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and assertion of the purport of the judgment party's argument, the plaintiff defendant cannot receive a distribution as a small lessee, merely because it is the most lessee.

Defendant’s social experience with no family-based experience and difficult family-based convenience is C operated by D with the help of F, a mother’s will.