1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. C is the owner of Seo-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On May 30, 2008, F Co., Ltd. completed the registration of the establishment of a new mortgage on the instant real estate in the amount of KRW 30,000,000, and the debtor C.

C. On May 14, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with C by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 30,000,000 for the instant real estate and the lease period of KRW 24 months.

Since then on May 2016, the auction procedure of real estate was initiated upon the application of G Co., Ltd. (formerly, H Co., Ltd) to commence a voluntary auction, which is another collateral security (formerly: H Co.) for the instant real estate.

E. In the above auction procedure, the Plaintiff received a total of KRW 16,00,000 as a tenant of small claims (order 1) and a relative tenant (order 3) (=12,000,000,000). The Defendant received a dividend of KRW 22,981,895 as a whole creditor (order 4) on the ground that the Defendant was issued an order of seizure and assignment of the claim against F’s dividends based on the monetary claim against F against the Defendant.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 6 evidence, Eul’s 1 through 3, and 6(including partial numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The secured debt of F Co., Ltd., a mortgagee of the Plaintiff’s assertion C, was entirely extinguished on or around August 19, 2009, prior to the said voluntary auction procedure, and the said secured debt also ceased to exist.

Therefore, inasmuch as the Defendant received dividends as a full creditor of the said mortgagee, even though there was no dividends to be distributed during the above auction procedure, the said dividends amounting to KRW 22,981,895 constitutes unjust enrichment without any legal ground.

Therefore, the defendant paid 11,00,000 won to the plaintiff as the tenant of small amount who was not properly distributed to the plaintiff = 27,000,000 won of small amount deposit that the defendant could have received as dividends - actually distributed dividends.