1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

On July 7, 2011, the Defendant leased KRW 35,000,000 as lease deposit, and KRW 24 months from August 9, 2011, the lease deposit was paid around that time.

From August 9, 2011, the Defendant began to possess the instant real estate, and completed the move-in report on October 6, 201.

On February 15, 2017, there was a voluntary decision to commence the auction of the instant real estate to the Jeonju District Court and the registration of the voluntary decision to commence the auction was completed on the same day.

The type of demand for distribution was set on May 18, 2017 in the auction procedure in which the above auction procedure overlaps with D, E, and F (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).

In the instant auction procedure, the said court determined the amount to be actually distributed as KRW 935,270,724 as of March 9, 2018, and then prepared a distribution schedule that distributes KRW 14,000,000 on the ground that the Defendant is a small lessee.

After raising an objection to the entire amount distributed to the Defendant, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against distribution on March 16, 2018.

On the other hand, on April 10, 2017, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the limited company G with the Jeonju District Court Decision 2017Kadan1026, which sought the return of the lease deposit, and was sentenced to the judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on June 27, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

In addition, on April 12, 2017, the Defendant received the order of lease registration as to the instant real estate under the Jeonju District Court's branch court's 2017Kao6, and completed the lease registration on May 8, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1, 5, and 7's statements, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the plaintiff's argument as a whole, the defendant has only been registered as a resident in the real estate of this case, but has not actually resided, and only his address has been maintained for the purpose of returning the lease deposit.

The Plaintiff leased the instant real estate from G to limited liability company.