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

A. On January 30, 2015, the Defendant leased the E-art located in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si from C.

B. At the time, the E-Mart was used by F before the former lessee, and on June 20, 2015, the Defendant and F entered into a sublease contract (hereinafter “the instant sub-lease contract”) with F to the effect that F is sub-leased KRW 35,00,000,000, monthly rent, KRW 2,700,000 (including value-added tax) and the sublease period from February 1, 2015 to January 31, 2017.

C. However, F did not pay the Defendant the rent for November, December, 2015, and January, 2016. Ultimately, the Defendant and F agreed on the instant sub-lease agreement around January, 2016.

On February 18, 2016, the Plaintiff received a collection order for the attachment and collection of the instant claim against F in relation to KRW 25,000,000, out of the deposit for sub-lease of this case against F by a notary public of F on February 18, 2016, based on the money loan loan No. 1032 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”). The Plaintiff served the Defendant, a debtor, on February 23, 2016, with the collection order for the attachment and collection of the instant claim (hereinafter “instant claim seizure and collection order”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Gap evidence No. 5, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 5 through 7 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted by the parties that the Defendant bears the obligation to return the instant sub-lease deposit to F, and sought a payment from the Defendant for collection according to the seizure and collection order of the instant sub-lease.

In the event that the Defendant and F fail to pay the F in arrears not less than twice due to the special agreement while entering into the instant sub-lease contract, the Defendant decided to waive the instant sub-lease deposit, and the Defendant’s failure to pay F more than twice thereafter.