2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3.Paragraph 1.

A. On January 19, 2014, the Plaintiff, China, entered into a lease agreement with respect to 208 units of the five-story building of D-ground reinforced concrete structure (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by C and C with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 42 million, and from February 8, 2014 to February 7, 2015, the lease deposit was fully paid on February 8, 2014, and the date of stay was reported on February 14, 2014 and received the fixed date under the said lease agreement.

B. The above lease agreement has been implicitly renewed. On May 12, 201, 201, the auction procedure was commenced on July 25, 201, at the request of the Bank of Korea, a corporation that created the right to collateral security on the instant building.

C. The plaintiff asked the defendant, who entrusted the building of this case, about whether to demand a distribution in the above auction procedure, and asked the defendant whether to demand a distribution from the defendant. However, the plaintiff asked again whether the defendant was able to know about it, and the defendant did not know about it to be well resolved.

Accordingly, the plaintiff did not demand a distribution, and eventually, it was impossible to receive a distribution in the above auction procedure.

On February 16, 2017, the Defendant prepared a written confirmation to the Plaintiff that “In the process of the above auction, the Plaintiff confirms that the Defendant will be responsible for the amount that the Plaintiff should receive as the top priority payment.”

E. The instant building was sold to a third party by means of voluntary auction on January 23, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Based on the above written confirmation, the Plaintiff seeks payment of the lease deposit amount of KRW 42 million to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant stated in the above written confirmation that he is responsible for the "amount to be paid as the top priority in the course of auction", and although there is an expression "the top priority repayment", the defendant prepared the above written confirmation.