1. The plaintiff's claim that is changed in exchange in the trial is dismissed.

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

If Gap's evidence Nos. 3, 4, and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 5 included the whole purport of the pleadings, Eul paid KRW 961,660 on November 30, 2001 for the auction proceeds of real estate auction cases, including the Seoul District Court C's real estate auction, and on December 13, 2005, and did not find KRW 961,440 on December 16, 201 for the remainder of the auction proceeds despite the completion of the above auction case, it is recognized that Eul transferred the right to claim the return of the auction proceeds to the plaintiff on January 16, 2015, and the Eul transferred the right to claim the return of the auction proceeds to the National Treasury on June 2015.

However, the right to claim the return of the above auction deposit, which is a right to the same state as the right to claim the return of money, shall be extinguished by the prescription if it has not been exercised for five years (Article 96 of the National Finance Act). In the case of the Government custody deposit with the deadline for cancellation of the obligation to retain, it shall be reverted to the National Treasury if it is not claimed for refund after five years from the end of the case (Article 1 of the Government Custody Act). As such, the right to claim the return of the above auction deposit shall be extinguished on December 13, 2005 and five years have elapsed since the expiration of the above auction case, while the lawsuit of this case was filed on October 27, 2014, which was later.

(A) The procedure of reversion to the National Treasury is merely an administrative procedure and does not affect the expiration of the statute of limitations. Thus, the plaintiff's claim seeking the return of the above auction deposit, that is, the claim of this case changed in exchange in the trial, is dismissed as it is without merit.