1. The main claim of this case is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) in total.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 2, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Nonparty D on a deposit of KRW 30,00,000 as to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and the lease agreement from August 16, 2014 to August 16, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). On August 21, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Nonparty D, and received a fixed date on the said lease agreement.

B. Around January 19, 2012, the Defendant remitted D 130,000,000 to D; around that time, Nonparty E prepared a loan certificate with the obligor; on the same day, the Defendant was set up a collateral security right worth KRW 195,00,000 with respect to the instant real estate as the obligor, E, the mortgagee, the maximum debt amount, and the maximum debt amount.

C. On December 31, 2010, the instant real estate held in the auction procedure had been set with the right to collateral security in the name of the Defendant, Seoul Agricultural Cooperatives, the maximum debt amount of 453,600,000 won, the debtor D, the right to collateral security in the Seoul Agricultural Cooperatives, the maximum debt amount of 42,00,000 won, the debtor D, and the right to collateral security in the name of the Defendant.

However, the above-mortgage Seoul Agricultural Cooperative filed an application for the auction of real estate rent with the Gangwon-gu District Court Goyang support C with respect to the real estate in this case, and the auction procedure was commenced on October 15, 2014 after receiving the decision.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff reported the demand and right as a lessee at the instant auction procedure.

The court, upon the preparation of a distribution schedule, prepared a distribution schedule to distribute the amount of KRW 76,549,997 to the defendant, except for the plaintiff from the distribution of dividends.

Accordingly, the plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection against KRW 22,00,000 among the defendant's dividends.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence No. 18 to 21, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff alleged by the parties has entered into a lease agreement with D on the instant real estate.