1. Of the dividend table prepared on October 29, 2013 by the above court with respect to the auction of the real estate B in Incheon District Court.

1. Basic facts

A. In order to secure the obligation of 106,00,000 won for loans to C, the Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on September 2, 2008 with respect to the third floor No. 301 (hereinafter “the instant real property”) of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government Down-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “the instant real property”) with the maximum debt amount of 137,80,000 won.

(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). B.

Since then, C did not pay interest on the above loan obligation, the Plaintiff filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate concerning the instant real estate with the Incheon District Court B, based on the instant collateral security, and received a voluntary decision to commence auction from the above court on January 22, 2013.

(hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). C.

During the auction procedure of this case, the defendant himself paid the deposit amount of KRW 23 million to the court of execution and claimed that he is the lessee who leased the real estate of this case, and filed a report on the right and demand for distribution.

In distributing the amount of KRW 79,038,170 to be actually distributed on the date of distribution implemented on October 29, 2013, the court of execution prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) with the content that, in order to distribute the amount of KRW 79,038,170 to the Defendant who applied for a demand for distribution as a small lessee, KRW 20,00,000 to the Defendant, who is the holder of the right to deliver, and KRW 102,420 to the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Incheon Metropolitan City, which is the holder of the right to deliver, and KRW 58,935,

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 October 31, 2013, within one week thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries in Gap's 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s primary assertion is that the Defendant, in collusion with C, entered into a false rental agreement on the instant real estate in order to receive a small-sum lease deposit under the Housing Lease Protection Act, or is entitled to a protection under the Housing Lease Protection Act.