2. The defendant B is entitled to paragraph 1.

A. On November 2, 2012, Defendant A leased the real estate listed in the separate sheet from Defendant B by setting the lease period of KRW 150,000,000, and the lease period from November 2, 2012 to November 1, 2014.

B. On February 13, 2014, the Plaintiff received a decision on provisional seizure of claims against Defendant A’s claim to return the lease deposit against Defendant B by Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014Kadan50263, and the above original copy of the decision is the same year.

3. It was served on Defendant B on 26.

C. On January 26, 2015, the Plaintiff received a judgment against Defendant A to pay KRW 192,718,540, and damages for delay as to KRW 192,054,339, which became final and conclusive in the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Da52799 Decided January 26, 2015.

On March 17, 2015, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order from Seoul Western District Court 2015TTT3452, that the Plaintiff may collect the claims seized by transferring the above provisional seizure to the provisional seizure. The above order was served to the Defendant B around that time.

Grounds for Recognition: Facts that there is no dispute between Defendant A and Defendant B, Gap 1-1, 2, A 2-1, 2, A, 3-1, 2, and 4; the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. According to the allegations and the facts of the above recognition, since the term of the above lease expires on November 1, 2014, the defendant A has a duty to deliver the above real estate to the defendant C, and the plaintiff as the creditor of the defendant A, who is the collection right holder of the lease deposit repayment claim, may exercise it on his/her behalf.

In addition, Defendant C is obligated to return the lease deposit to the Plaintiff simultaneously with the delivery of the above real estate.

After the termination of the above lease period, Defendant C entered into a new lease contract with Defendant A in the amount of KRW 50,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,000,000, and thereafter, Defendant A delayed payment of monthly rent. However, as seen earlier, Defendant C’s original copy of the provisional attachment order on claims to refund deposit was delivered to Defendant C prior to the termination of the above lease period.