1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On May 7, 2014, the Defendant entered into a lease contract with respect to the real estate indicated in B and attached Form (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with a lease deposit of KRW 24 million and the lease term from May 25, 2014 to May 24, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and obtained the fixed date of the lease contract on May 13, 2014.

B. On June 13, 2014, according to the application for voluntary auction by the Plaintiff and Industrial Bank of Korea, the mortgagee, the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”), a voluntary auction procedure was initiated under the Busan District Court Branch C and D (Dupl).

C. In the instant auction procedure, the Defendant reported rights as a small lessee and demanded distribution. D.

On June 26, 2015, the court of execution prepared a distribution schedule (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”) that distributes the amount of KRW 509,329 to the Defendant, who is a lessee of small claims, in the order of first priority, KRW 16,00,00 in the amount to be distributed in the amount of KRW 407,352,896, which is the lessee of small claims, in the order of second priority to the Plaintiff, the mortgagee, and KRW 390,734,836 in the order of second priority to the Defendant, the lessee of large claims.

E. At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, B was in a state of insolvency in excess of active property, and there was no particular property other than the instant real estate.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap1, 6 evidence, Eul evidence Nos. 1, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of this Court, fact-finding results on the Credit Guarantee Fund, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion A) The Defendant concluded the instant lease agreement with the intent to gain unjust benefits by abusing the Housing Lease Protection Act to protect small tenants. Therefore, the instant lease agreement constitutes a fraudulent act as a false declaration of agreement, and the Defendant cannot be deemed a small lessee subject to protection under the Housing Lease Protection Act. (B) Therefore, the instant lease agreement should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the instant lease agreement should be revoked.