A. On October 25, 2016, C leased each of the lease deposit of KRW 10,000,000 from the Defendant, Gangnam-gu Seoul Building E (hereinafter “instant lease deposit”), monthly rent of KRW 900,000, and the period from October 25, 2016 to October 25, 2017, respectively.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

On July 6, 2018, the Defendant terminated the instant lease agreement with C on July 6, 2018, and at the same time returned KRW 5,595,990, which deducted the overdue rent, etc. from the lease deposit of this case from C.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1, 2, and Eul 1

2. The Plaintiff asserted and determined that on May 21, 2018, the Plaintiff received KRW 6,000,000, out of the claim to return the lease deposit of this case from C (hereinafter “transfer of claim of this case”), and C notified F, a defendant’s agent, of the instant transfer of claim by telephone, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 6,00,000 and delay damages to the Plaintiff.

Although the assignment of claims in this case occurred, it is not sufficient to acknowledge that the notice of assignment of claims in this case was given as alleged by the plaintiff only with the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 9, and Eul evidence No. 2, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3. As such, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with some different conclusions, the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revoked part shall be dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.