Whether a person is a genuine small lessee who entered into and resided in a housing lease agreement;

The fact that additional lease deposit is paid and leased for the use of one square column in the situation where a lessee has already been located is contrary to the transaction formula, and it is difficult to view that a small amount of lease deposit was actually paid because it is difficult to deem that a lessee has actually paid a lease deposit.

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Pursuant to the distribution schedule prepared by the above court on May 16, 2008, the amount of dividends to the plaintiff shall be KRW 14,000,000 among the distribution schedule prepared by the above court on May 16, 2008, the amount of dividends to the plaintiff shall be reduced to KRW 12,951,851 for the defendant ○○○○ Mutual Savings Bank, which shall be reduced to KRW 6,48,176, and the amount of dividends to the defendant ○○○○ Mutual Savings Bank, which shall be corrected to delete KRW 7,536,352 for the defendant's Republic of Korea.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 13, 2001, with respect to 00-1, 101 ○○-1, 1804 m2, 1804 m2, located in Busan, ○○○-dong, Busan, ○○○-1, 101 m2, and 1804 m2, a national bank, which completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on May 23, 2007, received a decision to commence the auction as Busan District Court 2007 m24304 on August 25, 2003, and the Defendant bank, which completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on August 25, 2003, was also going through the auction procedure upon the said court’s decision to commence the auction procedure.

B. On January 19, 2007, the Plaintiff demanded the distribution of the rent deposit in the above auction case as the small lessee who leased the small room of 14,000,000 among the above apartment units as the small lessee who leased the small room of 14,00,000 among the above apartment units.

C. On May 16, 2008, the Busan District Court distributed 118,666,236 won among the amount to be actually distributed on the date of distribution of the above auction case to the ○○○○○○ of the other small lessee, 178,060 won, 178,060 won to the head of Busan District Office who is the second-class mortgagee, the third-class mortgagee, and 84,00,000 won to the above national bank, which is the first-class mortgagee, the third-class mortgagee, and 12,951,824 won to demand distribution to the defendant bank, and 12,804,669 won among the amount to be distributed to the defendant bank and the Republic of Korea (with no jurisdiction over the plaintiff, the plaintiff was excluded from the above dividends.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap-5, entries in Eul-2-2, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is a small-sum lessee under the Housing Lease Protection Act who entered into and resided in the housing lease agreement with the former owner of the above apartment, and should be entitled to the deposit for lease in preference to the defendants.

B. According to each of the statements of the plaintiff and Jeondae-dong, Gap 2-1, Gap 2, Gap 4, Eul 8, Eul 3-1, the plaintiff and Jeon Soo-dong, on January 19, 2007, entered into a lease contract with the plaintiff to pay the lease deposit amount of 14 million won for the small room among the above apartment, and the plaintiff completed the move-in report on the above apartment on January 23, 2007 and obtained the fixed date of the above lease contract and resided in the above apartment.

However, according to Gap 1-2, Eul 3-1, Eul 4, and Eul 2-1 of each of the above apartment units, it is difficult for the plaintiff to use the above apartment units for the actual purpose of use of the above 1-2, Eul 3-1, Eul 4, and Eul 2-1, and the 1-100,000 won of the above apartment units had already been leased 15,000 won of the rent deposit to the ○○○○○○○○○, a small amount of one of the above apartment units on January 18, 2007. The plaintiff's words Kim Jong-, the provisional attachment of the above apartment units on January 3, 2007 was recognized, and it is difficult for the plaintiff to use the above apartment units with the above 1-1,7333,00 won of the rent deposit to the ○○○○○○○○, which is the first 5-1,500,000 won of the rent deposit, and the purport of the whole 1-2,0007,00.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the plaintiff cannot be deemed a legitimate small-sum lessee who is subject to protection under the Housing Lease Protection Act, it is just to exclude the plaintiff from the distribution of dividends, and the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it