1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Nonparty C owned “D Apartment No. 306 and No. 804 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”). From June 15, 2005 to January 12, 2009, Nonparty C completed the registration of provisional seizure equivalent to KRW 59,778,666 of the said real estate, which was completed on November 24, 2014, based on the Korean Skhovas Bank Co., Ltd., Ltd., the maximum debt amount, KRW 265,200,00, total debt amount, and KRW 265,200,00.

B. On February 12, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between Nonparty C with the lease deposit amounting to KRW 20,000,000 for the instant real estate, KRW 500,00 for the rent, and the lease term period from March 3, 2015 to March 2, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and completed the move-in report and the fixed date on February 24, 2015.

C. As to the above real estate, Korea Standards Bank, Inc., a collateral security right holder, applied for the commencement of voluntary auction to Ji Government District Court Goyang Branch B, and on April 1, 2015, the auction procedure was conducted in accordance with its decision.

On December 30, 2015, the above court excluded the Plaintiff from the distribution schedule, and prepared a distribution schedule that distributes the amount of KRW 26,361,983 to the Defendant, who is the person holding the provisional seizure.

(hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”). The Plaintiff appeared on the date of distribution, and raised an objection against KRW 16,00,000 out of the Defendant’s dividend amount.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff alleged by the parties is a genuine tenant who can enter into a lease agreement with C on the instant real estate and receive protection under the Housing Lease Protection Act that has paid deposit, so it is improper to receive a small amount of security deposit in preference to other creditors, but the instant distribution schedule excluding the plaintiff's dividends is unfair. 12,00,000 won out of the defendant's dividend amount is corresponding to the small amount of security deposit.