1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. During the period of Gyeyang-si owned in D, the court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that the Defendant distributes the amount of KRW 2,161,131, total KRW 18,161,161,131 to the Defendant as a small lessee and the fixed date lessee in the order of 16,00,000 and KRW 2,161,131 in the order of priority as a small lessee.

B. The Defendant already received the entire deposit from D around November 28, 201, prior to the preparation of the above distribution schedule.

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

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant was already paid the entire deposit with D, and that the defendant was unjustly entitled to the above 18,161,131 won of the right to claim the return of unjust enrichment based on the above claim, and thus, the plaintiff is obligated to transfer the above right to claim the return of unjust enrichment from D to the plaintiff who acquired the above right to claim the return of unjust enrichment and to notify the Republic of Korea that he transferred the right

3. Determination

A. If a non-right holder received dividends in the distribution procedure, this would have made unjust enrichment without any legal ground, or the person who has suffered damages therefrom would not be deemed to have reverted to a debtor even if the person who would have received dividends if the dividends had not been erroneous, or if there was a person entitled to receive the dividends in the following order, it would not be deemed that

B. (Supreme Court Decision 9Da53230 delivered on October 10, 2000, etc.).

In light of the above legal principles, this case is examined.

According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and the whole arguments, a large number of creditors (excluding the defendant) with regard to D in the above distribution procedure received only a pro rata distribution. Since the amount not paid out of the distribution amount exceeds 18,161,131 won of the above dividends against the defendant, it is limited to the distribution to other creditors without the above dividends against the defendant.