1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On May 23, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the creation of a collateral security right (hereinafter “instant collateral security right”) with respect to real estate listed in the separate list owned by B (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on May 23, 2012, which is KRW 2730,000,000,000 for the maximum debt amount.

B. Since then, the Plaintiff applied for a voluntary auction of real estate on the instant real estate to Incheon District Court C based on the instant collateral security, and this court rendered a voluntary decision to commence auction on March 26, 2014.

(hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). C.

The Defendant asserted that the instant real estate was a lessee who paid the deposit amount of KRW 27 million during the instant auction procedure, and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution.

On November 28, 2014, this Court prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that distributes KRW 22,00,000 to the Defendant who demanded a distribution as a small lessee on the date of distribution, KRW 664,340 in the second order, to the Incheon Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, the National Health Insurance Corporation Vice-Governor of Incheon, the issuing authority, to KRW 427,820 in the third order, KRW 104,620 in the third order, and KRW 104,620 in the third order to the Incheon Yeonsu-gu, the issuing authority, to the Plaintiff, the mortgagee, and KRW 22,095,320 in the fourth order to the Plaintiff.

E. Accordingly, on the aforementioned date of distribution, the Plaintiff raised an objection to the entire amount of distribution to the Defendant, and thereafter filed the instant lawsuit on December 5, 2014, within one week thereafter.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the lease agreement entered into between the Defendant and B constitutes a fraudulent act is revoked, and the instant distribution schedule should be revised as stated in the purport of the claim by restitution.

However, the defendant has concluded a lease contract to gain unjust benefits by abusing the Housing Lease Protection Act.