1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. In order to secure the performance of the obligation for the purchase of goods owned by Nonparty C, the Plaintiff entered into a mortgage agreement with the maximum debt amount of KRW 48,000,00 with respect to 403 Dong-dong E 1304, Gyeyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoul, the representative director of the said company, and completed the registration of the establishment of the mortgage in the name of the Plaintiff on December 29, 2010.

B. On July 24, 2013, the Defendant entered into a lease contract with D by setting the deposit amount of KRW 30,000,000, and the term of lease from July 24, 2013 to July 23, 2015, and completed the fixed date and move-in report on July 25, 2013.

C. The Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction to the High Government District Court Goyang Branch B, as C did not perform the obligation for the purchase price of goods, and the auction procedure was conducted on September 23, 2013 by the said court’s decision on voluntary auction. The Defendant filed an application for a report on the right to lease deposit and a demand for distribution with respect to the said auction procedure.

Meanwhile, on the other hand, the new bank filed an application for voluntary auction to G G in the above court on November 22, 2013 with respect to the instant real estate and other real estate owned D (F 203 Dong-dong, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, and F 2002, the above court held two cases jointly and conducted the auction procedure. D. On November 21, 2014, the above court prepared a distribution schedule to the Defendant on November 21, 2014 to distribute KRW 22,00,00, which is recognized as having the preferential right to payment as a small lessee, and distribute KRW 766,456,925 to ES12 Specialized Asset-backed Limited Company, which is the senior mortgagee, and distribute KRW 10,555,391 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

A) The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution and raised an objection against the Defendant’s amount of distribution. [The grounds for recognition are as follows: (a) Facts that there is no dispute; (b) evidence No. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8; and (c) evidence No. 1; and (d) purport of the whole

2. The plaintiff alleged by the parties is a house at the time of the auction of the real estate of this case.