1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 6:

On January 20, 2012, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 52,00,000 to C, and completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage, which is the debtor C and the mortgagee, with respect to the Seo-gu Incheon Special Metropolitan City D 19,401 (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by C on the same day.

B. The Plaintiff around July 1, 2014

Based on the right to collateral security, the Incheon District Court filed an application for a voluntary auction of the instant building B with the Incheon District Court, and the decision of voluntary auction was rendered on July 2, 2014 by the above court.

C. The Defendant asserted that the lease contract was concluded between C and C as of February 17, 2012, which was stipulated from March 4, 2012 to March 4, 2014 as the lease deposit amount of KRW 21,00,000,00 for the instant building, and that the lease contract was concluded between March 4, 2012 and March 4, 2014, and filed an application for a report on rights and a demand for distribution with the auction court around August 26, 2014, during the said auction procedure.

On April 13, 2015, the auction court prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) that distributes the amount of KRW 20,584,562 to the Plaintiff, who is the applicant creditor (the mortgagee), in the first order of KRW 41,361,764, and the third order of KRW 20,680,882, and the third order of KRW 20,582 to the Defendant, who is the applicant creditor.

E. The Plaintiff appeared on the aforementioned date of distribution, and stated an objection to the full amount of distribution to the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on April 15, 2015, which was within seven days thereafter.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is selectively selected, since the Defendant is the most lessee, the amount of dividend against the Defendant is to be deleted, or it is a fraudulent act to conclude a lease agreement on the building of this case between (the tenant’s assertion) and C in excess of obligations, and thus, the amount of dividend against the Defendant should be revoked and the amount of dividend should be deleted

(b) a revocation of a fraudulent act;

The defendant's summary of the defendant's assertion is between C.