A. On March 28, 2017, Defendant C entered into a lease agreement with Defendant D with regard to the instant real estate as the lease term from March 30, 2017 to March 30, 2019 (24 months), the lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000, and the rent amount of KRW 450,000 (payment on March 30, 201).

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

Defendant C borrowed KRW 18,00,000 from Plaintiff and Plaintiff E on November 27, 2017, and transferred to Plaintiff and Plaintiff E the claim for refund of KRW 18,000,000 out of the deposit deposit under the instant lease agreement. Upon delegation from Defendant C, the transferor, the transferor, notified the Defendant D of the fact of the assignment of the said assignment, and the notification was served on Defendant D on October 8, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Evidence Nos. 1, 2-3, 3-1, 2, and 5

2. In determining the legitimacy of the part of future damages for delay, the Plaintiff sought damages for delay from the day following the date of delivery of the instant real estate against Defendant D. This is to claim damages for delay against Defendant D, which the Plaintiff will have against Defendant D after the simultaneous performance of the instant real estate was transferred by Defendant D from Defendant C, and the simultaneous performance of the instant real estate was extinguished.

In conclusion, it is not sufficient to recognize that Defendant D could not expect to perform the instant real estate at will even after the delivery of the instant real estate by Defendant C, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently.

Therefore, the lawsuit on this part is unlawful as there is no need to claim in advance, and there is no benefit of lawsuit.

3. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

B. Grounds for recognition: Article 208 of the Civil Procedure Act.