1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant, who was the mortgagee of the right to collateral security against D 101 Dong 1105, 105 (hereinafter “instant apartment”), owned by C, filed an application for voluntary auction with the Suwon District Court regarding the instant apartment, and the said court rendered a voluntary decision to commence the auction on August 11, 2015.

B. On April 21, 2016, the above court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes KRW 1,064,220 to the defendant (the applicant creditor and the mortgagee-mortgage) in the order of first priority among the amount to be distributed to him/her on the date of distribution 297,415,972, and the amount to be actually distributed to him/her on the date of distribution 296,351,752, and the plaintiff raised an objection against KRW 27,00,000 out of the amount of distribution to the defendant on the date of distribution.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there exists no dispute, the entry of Gap's evidence 2 or Gap's evidence 4, the purport of whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is a small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act with a move-in report and a fixed date, and the court failed to receive the mail from the court, which was served on the Plaintiff’s domicile, and thereafter, the court became aware on October 13, 2015, which was the completion date of the demand for distribution, that an auction was being conducted after the lapse of October 13, 2015, and then the Plaintiff filed a report on the lessee’s right and demand for distribution. The Plaintiff sought the distribution of KRW 27,00,000 as

B. A person who is qualified to sue a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution shall be present on the date of distribution and raise an objection on the date of distribution, and in order for a creditor to be present on the date of distribution and make an objection on the date of distribution and to file an objection on the substantive nature of the distribution schedule, the creditor against the executory debtor under substantive law is insufficient, and the legitimate demand for distribution has been made by the deadline for the completion of the demand for distribution. The creditor who did not lawfully demand a distribution does not have the right to make an objection on the date of distribution and on the date of distribution, who was present on the date of distribution and on the date of distribution.