1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 14, 2012, with respect to the registration of the establishment of a mortgage-based agricultural cooperative owned by Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D and 401 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”), KRW 132 million was completed on December 14, 2012, the registration of the establishment of a mortgage-based resident’s neighboring mortgage-based agricultural cooperative, the maximum debt amount of KRW 86 million on February 21, 2014, and the registration of the establishment of a mortgage-based neighboring mortgage-based

B. On July 23, 2015, upon the application of the Young-dong Agricultural Cooperatives, which is the right to collateral security, a voluntary decision to commence the auction (Seoul Southern District Court B; hereinafter “instant auction”) was rendered on the instant real estate. On October 2, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a report on the right and demand for distribution as a lessee among the instant real estate, at the instant auction procedure on October 2, 2015.

C. On September 7, 2016, a date of distribution of the instant auction, a court of execution prepared a distribution schedule to distribute 347,860 won to the Yangcheon-gu Office as the holder of the first distribution right, 132,00,000 won to the Young-dong Agricultural Cooperative, as the holder of the second-order collective security right and the second-order collective security right, as the holder of the second-order collective security right, the Defendant as the third-class collective security holder, 81,23,103 won to the Defendant, and 13,50 won to the Yangcheon-gu Office as the holder of the third-class collective security right.

The Plaintiff appeared on the date of the above distribution, and raised an objection against KRW 19,866,50 of the Defendant’s dividend amount of KRW 81,233,103, and filed the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Class A evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff is a small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act, which increased the deposit amount to KRW 20 million on May 2014, after the Plaintiff leased 1 column of the instant real estate from C around March 2013 to KRW 15 million, and that the Plaintiff should be entitled to the Plaintiff’s deposit in preference to the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant is the most lessee who prepared a false lease contract to obtain the preferential repayment as a small lessee.