1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 1, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant and the Defendant, setting the contract term of two years and the lease deposit amount of eight million won as to subparagraph 402 of Article 401 of the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D No. 401 (hereinafter “instant building”) on the left side of the stairs, which did not appear on the register or the building register, with the entrance door on the left side of the stairs.

B. On July 11, 2011, the Plaintiff transferred 402 of the instant building, and completed the move-in report as the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D building 402.

C. On the other hand, the building of this case, upon the voluntary request of the Korea Saemaul Bank, which is the right to collateral security regarding the building of this case, had started the auction procedure in this court C.

On July 17, 2014, the Plaintiff reported a right as the lessee and demanded a distribution, but this court did not distribute to the Plaintiff, but distributed KRW 30,285,904 to the Defendant, the owner.

Accordingly, the plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the amount of distribution to the defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The resident registration, which is defined as the requirement for opposing power along with the delivery of a house under Article 3(1) of the Housing Lease Protection Act, is prepared by a public announcement method that enables a third party to clearly recognize the existence of a right of lease for the stabilization of transaction. Thus, whether the resident registration has the effect of public announcement of a lease shall be determined depending on whether the lessee can be recognized as a person who has an address or residence in the relevant lease building due to his resident registration under the general social norms.

Although it is evident that 402 of the instant building constitutes part of the instant building, the Plaintiff’s domicile or residence is a resident registration with the number of units, not 401, but 402, on the registry of the instant building, while making a move-in report.