A. On January 31, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 177 million, and the term of lease from February 28, 2012 to February 27, 2014, on the lease deposit of KRW 177,00,000,000, and KRW 1002,000,000,000,000 from Defendant B (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. On October 2, 2012, the registration for the transfer of ownership in the name of Defendant C was completed on the ground of the receipt of the Goyang-gu District Court Goyang Branch of the Goyang Branch of the Seoul District Court by No. 126589 on October 2, 2012.

C. On the other hand, on August 25, 201, the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation completed the registration of establishment of a collateral security right to which the obligor, Defendant B, and the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation was the Han-gu District Court, under Article 115932 upon receipt of the senior registry office for the establishment of a senior district court in the apartment in the instant apartment as of August 25, 201. Defendant C took over a loan contract with Defendant B National Agricultural Cooperative Federation on October 19, 2012, and completed the registration of establishment of a collateral security right to which the debtor of the establishment of a collateral security right was changed to Defendant C as of October 135159 of the same registry office as of October 19, 2012.

The National Agricultural Cooperative Federation applied for a voluntary auction on the apartment of this case to Jung-gu District Court Goyang-Support E, and received a voluntary auction order on October 23, 2013. The apartment of this case was sold at 336.5 million won in the above auction procedure on May 20, 2014. The above sale price did not reach the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation's collateral collateral obligation, and the Plaintiff failed to receive dividends in the above distribution procedure.

E. On September 6, 2014, the Plaintiff removed from the apartment of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim against the main defendant B

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendant B conspired with Defendant C, who became aware of the Plaintiff’s husband F through G, in order to exempt the Plaintiff from the obligation to return the lease deposit against the Plaintiff.