1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

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

1. Facts of premise;

A. (1) On December 10, 2014, the Defendant concluded the instant lease agreement between C and C, which is KRW 37,000,000 as to the instant housing owned by C, and the term of lease from February 1, 2015 to January 31, 2017.

As of the date of the above lease agreement, the instant house did not have any physical restrictions, such as mortgages or provisional seizure, except for the establishment registration of a mortgage in the name of the debtor C, the maximum debt amount of which was 182,00,000,000 won, and the establishment registration of a mortgage in the name of another insurance company, which was made on December 3, 2014.

Article 22(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “The Plaintiff shall pay the Plaintiff a down payment of KRW 3,700,000 on the contract date through the Matrimonial Engagement D (Report of Marriage on January 29, 2015) and the remainder of KRW 33,140,000 on January 20, 2015 (Deduction of KRW 160,000 for the Defendant’s substitute payment) and the Defendant shall receive the instant house and completed the move-in report on January 26, 2015.

B. On January 30, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of a collateral security right and the establishment of a collateral security right (hereinafter “registration of the instant collateral security right”) on the ground of a contract establishing the said house with C on the same day, and on the ground of the contract establishing the said house.

B. At the auction procedure of this case, this court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that the Defendant distributed KRW 32,00,000 (small lessee) in the first order of March 18, 2016 and that the Plaintiff did not distribute to the Plaintiff at all. The Plaintiff raised an objection against KRW 26,00,000 out of the amount of dividends against the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-3 evidence, Eul 1-6, 8, 10, 11, and 14 (including above numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the part of the Defendant’s distribution, out of the amount of dividends, should be deleted, as the Defendant is the most lessee based on the false representation of agreement. However, there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant is the most lessee with only lease type, and as seen in the premise facts, the Defendant is rather the Defendant.