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

A. On July 28, 2008, the Defendant: (a) leased a house of 201 to 27 million won from the Daegu-gu and 3rd floor buildings on the ground (hereinafter “instant real estate”); (b) from July 28, 2008 to July 27, 2010, the Defendant leased a house of 201 to 3rd floor buildings on the ground (hereinafter “instant real estate”); and (c) paid KRW 27 million as the lease deposit.

B. On July 28, 2008, the Defendant received the above No. 201 and completed the move-in report on July 29, 2008, and obtained a fixed date on the same day, and no senior mortgage was established on the instant real estate at the time.

C. The defendant filed a lawsuit against C to the Daegu District Court on the ground that the above lease relationship has expired after the expiration of the lease relationship, and the above court rendered the judgment of this case that "C shall deliver the real estate of this case from the defendant and at the same time pay 27 million won to the defendant" in the above case.

The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

On August 21, 2013, Liber Capital Co., Ltd. acquired the ownership of the instant real estate at a successful bid during the compulsory auction procedure, and thereafter, upon the Defendant’s request, the succeeding execution clause that granted C’s successor to the instant judgment was granted to Liber Capital Co., Ltd.

E. On September 20, 2017, the Plaintiff acquired ownership by winning the instant real estate at a voluntary auction procedure.

Since then, upon the defendant's application, the instant succession execution clause was granted.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The defendant's claim for the return of the lease deposit recognized in the judgment of this case is a false claim, and the plaintiff did not succeed to the status of the lessor C in the judgment of this case.

Thus, since the execution clause of succession of this case was illegally granted, it is sought a judgment such as the statement in the purport of claim.

B. First of all, the instant judgment contests the substantive relationship of the claim for return of the lease deposit under the instant judgment.