On April 20, 2010, the Defendant submitted an application for a payment order of KRW 45 million for the deposit for the deposit of KRW 45 million to D on April 1, 2009, attached to the real estate lease agreement of KRW 45 million on the deposit of KRW 45 million for the deposit of KRW 45 million for the deposit of KRW 45 million for the deposit of KRW 45 million for the deposit of KRW 45 million, which was received from the Seoul Western District Court located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government. On April 28, 2010, the Defendant received a payment order from the above court for the deposit of KRW 45 million for the deposit of KRW 45 million.

However, in fact, the above real estate lease agreement will be paid KRW 45 million with D'303 on the basis of the real estate lease agreement from C and 303 on the basis of the real estate lease agreement.

“A contract which was proposed to the effect that it was issued and delivered in the form without being delivered KRW 45 million, and without being delivered KRW 45 million. The Defendant received the real estate lease contract from C in preparation for the unpaid payment of the construction price, but later, agreed to settle the claim for the construction price and the claim for the refund of the lease deposit. In fact, there was no fact that C paid KRW 45 million to D in the lease deposit against the above 303, and there was no fact that at the time of the preparation of the said real estate lease contract, it was agreed that C will substitute the payment for the construction price of KRW 45 million to D.

Nevertheless, on September 8, 2010, the Seoul Western District Court's civil 52 Germany case was received from the Plaintiff and D to the Seoul Western District Court for the reason of the objection of D on September 8, 2010 and the judgment continued, the above court paid the lease deposit for the above 303,00,000 won out of the construction cost that C would receive from D.