1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 16, 2013, upon filing a motion for auction by the Defendant, the Seoul Southern District Court C real estate auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction”) with the Seoul Southern District Court on the 701 Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E apartment No. 701 (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. On June 20, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a report on the right and demand for distribution by asserting that two partitions, which are part of the instant apartment, were leased to the executing court and resided in the lease deposit amount of KRW 25 million.

C. On February 12, 2014, a date of distribution of the instant auction procedure, the court of execution prepared a distribution schedule of KRW 285,793,138, which is to be actually distributed among the sales proceeds of the instant apartment, as KRW 597,660 in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and KRW 170,94,083 in the Korea Standards and Japan Bank, and KRW 82,270,773 in the Defendant, and KRW 35,769,00 in the Defendant, and KRW 482,395 in the Defendant, the debtor and the owner of the instant apartment, respectively.

On February 19, 2014, the Plaintiff stated an objection against KRW 25 million among the dividends against the Defendant on the aforementioned date of distribution, and filed the instant lawsuit on February 19, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, and 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) from D on September 1, 2012, the Plaintiff leased 25 million won and monthly rent of KRW 400,000,000,000, which are part of the instant apartment from D. On March 18, 2013, the Plaintiff occupied the instant apartment, and completed the move-in report on April 8, 2013, and completed the move-in report on April 10, 2013. Since the lease deposit was fully paid by April 10, 2013, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the amount distributed to the Defendant is distributed to the Plaintiff, who is a small lessee of the instant apartment. (2) The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff made a false lease agreement on the instant apartment, in order to obtain unjust benefits by abusing the provisions on the protection of small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act.