beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion
A. On April 11, 2013, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 1.5 billion to C as of October 11, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of the neighboring real estate indicated in [Attachment] real estate (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as security on December 19, 2013.
B. However, on April 16, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract with C to lease the instant real estate by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 40 million, monthly rent of KRW 520,000,000, and the lease term from May 24, 2014 to May 23, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).
C. After that, the Plaintiff failed to obtain a loan from C, and filed an application for commencement of auction on November 13, 2014, and received the instant decision on commencement of auction on the instant real estate. In the said auction procedure, on September 21, 2015, the auction court distributed KRW 25 million to the Defendant as the top priority lessee, and distributed KRW 224,520,339 to the Plaintiff, respectively.
However, since the defendant abused the protection provisions of small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act and concluded the lease contract of this case, it cannot be protected as a legitimate small lessee.
2. The facts stated in the evidence Nos. 1 through 6 alone that the Plaintiff loaned money to C as above; the Defendant concluded the instant lease agreement and received dividends of KRW 25 million as the top priority lessee in the instant auction procedure; the Plaintiff participated in the dividend procedure and raised an objection to the distribution of the Defendant; and on September 25, 2015, it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant concluded the instant lease agreement by abusing the provisions on protection of small lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act; and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.