1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. The summary of the case and the key issue Plaintiff: (a) leased each real estate indicated in the separate sheet to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”); and (b) drafted each lease contract; and (c) the lessee indicated in the contract as follows.

1. D E E in the lessee’s indication DF GH B I JK among the contracts on real estate in attached Form 1;

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff constitutes a lessee under a contract entered into by the joint name in the above lease agreement, and that the Defendant is obligated to deliver each of the real estate to the Plaintiff and return the unpaid rent or unjust enrichment, on the ground that the Plaintiff constitutes a lessee under a contract entered in the joint name in the above lease agreement.

As a representative director of C, the defendant is merely involved in the contract, and each party of the lease contract is C, and the defendant is not the party of the lease contract.

The issue of this case is whether the defendant is a joint lessee of each of the above lease agreements.

2. As to who is a party to a contract in cases where an actor who enters into a related legal doctrine was engaged in a legal act in the name of another person, the parties to the contract shall first be determined, if the actor and the other party agree with each other, according to the same intent; and if the other party does not coincide with the intent of the actor and the other party, on the basis of the overall circumstances before and after the conclusion of the contract, including the nature of the contract, the purpose of the contract, the conclusion of the contract, etc., a reasonable person shall be determined in accordance with

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Da44059, Dec. 12, 2003). Interpretation of a juristic act is clearly made clear the objective meaning given by the parties to the act of indication.