1. The Seoul Eastern District Court C, D (Dual) case of compulsory auction for real estate shall be prepared on January 24, 2019 by the above court.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 24, 2005, E completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the F apartment G of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. With respect to the instant apartment, E’s creditor H applied for a compulsory auction to Seoul Eastern District Court C, and rendered a judgment of compulsory auction on September 11, 2017. The creditor I applied for a voluntary auction to the Seoul East East District Court D and made a judgment of voluntary auction on December 8, 2017.

C. In the auction procedure, the Defendant submitted the lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) from April 28, 2017, which was issued with the fixed date on October 16, 2017, to the lessor, the Defendant, the lessee, the lease deposit KRW 20,000,000, and the lease term from April 28, 2017 to April 27, 2019.

On December 27, 2018, the apartment of this case was sold to J Co., Ltd. and the registration of ownership transfer was completed.

E. On January 24, 2019, the Seoul Eastern District Court prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that the Defendant, who is a small lessee, has the right to deliver (the pertinent tax), KRW 310,343,495, in the Seongdong-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which is the holder of the right to deliver (the pertinent tax) the amount of KRW 19,70,000 among KRW 609,675,595, which deducts the execution cost from the amount to be distributed as dividends, and KRW 20,00,000,000 among KRW 19,726,330,00 in the first priority order, who is the applicant creditor (the highest priority wage, etc.) in the first priority order, to the Defendant, who is a small lessee, and KRW 59,600,00 in the second priority order.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant issued KRW 20,000,000 for the lease deposit to E and the apartment of this case in the auction procedure for the apartment of this case, and it is recognized as the small lessee who resided in the lease contract after the conclusion of the lease contract, and is equivalent to the above lease deposit.