1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On April 13, 2012, the Plaintiff, a national foreigner of the People’s Republic of China who registered as a foreigner on April 13, 2012, entered into a lease agreement with G and paid a deposit amount of KRW 50,00,00 for KRW 50,00 and a deposit amount for two years from September 17, 2016 under the Immigration Control Act with respect to the housing of KRW 273 square meters and multi-family houses on the fourth floor owned by G, Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant real estate”). The Plaintiff reported and resided in the instant real estate on September 27, 2016 pursuant to the Immigration Control Act.

B. On August 21, 2019, in the auction procedure (Seoul Central District Court C compulsory auction, D, E, and F (Dupl) commenced upon the application of the J, a distribution schedule was prepared in order to distribute KRW 982,837,217 to the Defendant, who is a mortgagee of a collective security (No. 310436, Oct. 29, 2015) in the third order (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”).

C. In the above auction procedure, the auction court set the completion period to demand a distribution as March 12, 2018 and publicly announced it, but the Plaintiff submitted a written demand for distribution to the auction court in the camping on July 5, 2018.

On the date of distribution, the Plaintiff made a statement of demurrer against the distribution of KRW 32 million against the Defendant, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution within seven days thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 6 evidence (including branch numbers in case of additional number), Eul 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion at the auction court did not properly conduct an investigation into the current status of real estate, such as the lease relationship with the instant real estate, and did not pay any dividends to the Plaintiff in the above distribution procedure on the wind that the auction procedure proceeds without any notification to the Plaintiff who legitimately occupies the instant real estate. However, if the Plaintiff did not so, the Plaintiff is entitled to the priority payment claim under the Housing Lease Protection Act, and the Plaintiff is entitled to receive dividends as a small lessee prior to the Defendant.