The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The right to lease on a deposit basis of this case was succeeded to E, and it was succeeded to the Defendant again.

(A) Evidence Nos. 1 through 8; hereinafter the same shall apply).

The case of voluntary application for auction of F real estate in Seoul Southern District Court is the case that D applied for the right to lease on the deposit basis of this case after the completion period to demand a distribution in the Seoul Southern District Court G real estate compulsory auction case, which had already been decided to commence auction. The right to lease on deposit basis of this case

For these reasons, at an auction conducted in accordance with the procedure of compulsory auction of G real estate, the right to lease on a deposit basis of G is not extinguished by sale, and the buyer is deemed to have been acquired. On the other hand, the registration of the establishment of the right to lease on a deposit basis should have been cancelled at the time of the registration of the establishment of the right to lease on a deposit basis, and the Plaintiff’s assertion that the application for voluntary auction of

Since the right to lease on a deposit basis can not be established due to the nature of the right to lease on a deposit basis, the right to lease on a deposit basis can not be registered as to the right to a site of a specific section for exclusive use of an aggregate building, and an additional registration is made

However, unless there are special circumstances such as the regulations to make it possible to separate the section for exclusive use and the right to use the site, the right to lease on a deposit basis with regard to the section for exclusive use can also be divided from the proceeds of sale of the right to lease on a

Therefore, we cannot accept the Plaintiff’s assertion that a voluntary auction should be applied for a building on the ground that the registration of the establishment of the right to lease on a deposit basis of this case was registered with an additional statement “as to only the building”, or that the Defendant may receive dividends only from the proceeds

Thus, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.