1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On February 18, 2009, the Plaintiff lent KRW 95,000,000 to C, and completed the registration of establishment of collateral security (hereinafter “mortgage security”) of KRW 123,50,000 with respect to Article 204 of Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and KRW 1 parcel of land, F204, and KRW 123,50,000 (hereinafter “instant house”).

B. On September 9, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction on the basis of the instant right to collateral security, and thereafter, the lower court rendered a decision to commence voluntary auction (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).

C. In the instant auction procedure, the Defendant concluded a lease contract of KRW 20,000 with respect to the instant housing between C and G on January 12, 2013, and concluded a lease contract of KRW 20,000 with respect to the instant housing (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution by asserting that the instant lease contract constitutes a small lessee who has the right of priority repayment under the Housing Lease Protection Act by completing the transfer and occupancy of the resident registration.

On August 25, 2014, a court of execution of the instant auction procedure: (a) deemed the Defendant as a small lessee on the date of open distribution on August 25, 2014, and prepared a distribution schedule stating that the Defendant shall be KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendant; (b) as a creditor applying for auction, a mortgagee of the right to request auction, the Plaintiff stated an objection to the entire dividends against the Defendant on the date of distribution; and (c) filed the instant lawsuit on September 1, 2014, the period of one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the contract of this case is false, and the defendant is only the most lessee, while the defendant asserts that he is not the most lessee but the small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act.

B. In a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution 1, the other party.