1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage over the instant real estate owned by C on November 27, 2012, consisting of the maximum debt amount of KRW 72,800,000,00, in order to secure the debt amount of KRW 56,000.

(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). B.

C did not pay interest on the above loan obligation. As the Plaintiff applied for a voluntary auction of real estate on the instant real estate to Incheon District Court B based on the instant collateral security, and received a voluntary decision to commence auction from the above court on August 22, 2013.

(hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). C.

Meanwhile, during the auction procedure of this case, the Defendant asserted that he paid deposit of KRW 23 million to the executing court for the real estate of this case from C, and made a report on the right and demand for distribution.

On April 23, 2014, when a court of execution distributes the amount of KRW 44,406,445 to be actually distributed on the date of distribution as of April 23, 2014, the court of execution prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) to distribute the amount of KRW 22,00,000 to the Defendant who applied for a demand for distribution as a small lessee, and KRW 54,640 to the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Incheon Metropolitan City, which is the holder of the right to deliver, and KRW 22,351,80 to the Plaintiff who is the holder of the right to deliver,

E. Accordingly, on the aforementioned date of distribution, the Plaintiff raised an objection to the entire amount of distribution to the Defendant, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on April 13, 2014, within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries in Gap's 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's selective assertion is that the defendant concluded a false rental agreement on the real estate of this case in collusion with C in order to receive a small-sum lease deposit under the Housing Lease Protection Act. Thus, it is unlawful that the execution court deemed the defendant as a small-sum lessee and distributed 22 million won to the defendant.