The deposit is attributed to the assignee of the right to claim the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent.

Therefore, it cannot be asserted that a lease contract is valid to a real estate trust company, as it does not meet the requirements for allowing the conclusion of a lease contract for commercial buildings under the instant trust contract.

Article 24 of the National Tax Collection Act

2013Catus 504340 Preemptives

DefendantCC Industry Development for 1 Deposit, and pressure on D’s right to claim for payment of each deposit

In addition, on December 7, 2012, the director of the Ansan District Tax Office had a total of 7,102,813,990

the national tax of 10,239,988,540 won, each of which was due by Defendant DD to pay national tax

Accordingly, DefendantCC Industry Development as to the instant deposit No. 2, and D’s claim for withdrawal of each deposit

The rights were seized.

F. The plaintiff's acquisition of bonds and the preparation of the agreement of this case

1) On June 30, 2011, the Plaintiff was the Defendant among the instant commercial buildings from Defendant W real estate trust.

With respect to the portion owned by W real estate trust as trustee, EE shall occupy the above commercial building.

On July 4, 2011, the claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent was taken over, and on behalf of the defendant W real estate trust, the defendant W real estate trust was notified of the transfer of claim to B.

2) Meanwhile, the Plaintiff, DefendantCC Industry Development, D, W Real Estate Trust, EB

On May 30, 2012, written an agreement with the following contents (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement of this case"):

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

(b) Claim for confirmation of claim for refund of deposit;

1) Criteria for determining the subject to whom each of the instant claims for payment of deposit money belongs

As seen earlier, the instant lease agreement is valid between DefendantCC Industry Development and D and EE as a party, and as such, DefendantCC Industry Development and D and D are entitled to receive rent from EE under the said lease agreement. However, the instant lease agreement cannot be a legitimate source of right in relation to Defendant W real estate trust, which is the owner of some of the instant commercial buildings, and thus, Defendant W real estate trust has the right to seek return of unjust enrichment from the leased party against EE who occupied and used the instant commercial building without any legal cause.

In conclusion, it is unfair that Defendant BB has the right to rent or rent under the instant lease agreement.

Each of the instant deposits deposited with acquisition shall be determined according to the terms and conditions of the instant trust agreement, which regulates the legal relationship between DefendantCC Industry Development, D and Defendant W real estate trust, and which govern the legal relationship between D and Defendant W real estate trust.

At this time, the remaining Defendants except for DefendantCC industrial development, D, EB, W real estate trust are subject to the attachment of DefendantCC industrial development, DB’s rent claims, and DD’s rent claims to be entered in each of the instant deposits, or DefendantCC industrial development, and DD’s respective deposit claims to be deposited in each of the instant deposits. As such, each of the instant deposits is entitled to exercise their rights to be vested in DefendantCC industry development and DD, and thus, DefendantCC industrial development and DD’s interests are identical. Thus, the aforementioned Defendants and the Plaintiff are also subject to the ownership of each of the instant deposit claims to be deposited in accordance with the terms and conditions of the instant trust agreement.

2) Terms and conditions concerning the lease of real estate trusted under the instant trust contract

Article 8 of the first real estate management trust contract of this case is used and benefiting from trust real estate.

The duties of maintenance and management shall be in charge of the development of the DefendantCC industry, and D, and the duties of lease shall be performed.

CAA Corporation

Korea

VVVH buyers Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "VVVV sales council")

The establishment was established.

2) DefendantCC Industry Development, DD is under VVH following the conclusion of the instant trust agreement.

W real estate trust began to sell to the buyer the part entrusted to W real estate trust.

C. Conclusion of the instant lease agreement

1) DefendantCC Industry Development, D on August 24, 2007, leased VVA to EE Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) the first, the first, the first, and the fifth and fifth floors (hereinafter “the instant commercial building”) of A and B, respectively (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”).

2) The Plaintiff and Defendant VVV sales council respectively leased the instant commercial building to EE on the same day.

3) EE is the shopping mall called 'OOlet' from November 2007 to 'VValet'.

Defendant BB commenced the business after opening. The distribution business of EE on September 1, 2009

Along with the OOullet, the sector, the tenant status of the instant lease contract was succeeded by absorbing it.

D. Notice of termination of the instant lease agreement and seizure of rent claim

1) DefendantCC industry development, D’s appointment from Defendant W real estate trust

No delegation or certificate of seal under section 4(1) of the Loan Agreement shall be issued. E

the power of attorney on February 19, 2009 to Defendant CW real estate trust to DefendantCC Industry Development and D.

and on the ground that the certificate of seal impression was not submitted, the termination of the instant lease agreement

I explained.

2) Defendant W real estate trust in the instant commercial building among the monthly rents under the instant lease agreement calculated based on monthly sales from November 2007 to February 2009 of EE.

The amount equivalent to the ratio of the portion owned as a trustee shall be as follows:

- - The following table omitted:

3) On April 30, 2008, Defendant KimF and 16 others were issued a collection order for the seizure and collection of claims regarding the claim for rent under the instant lease agreement that DefendantCC Industry Development and DDD had against EE, with the claim amounting to KRW 1,696,787,281 in total of KRW 2008, Ansan District Court Branch 2008.

4) Defendant VVVH buyers’ conference is the Suwon District Court Branch 2009 others on November 2, 2009

under section 53,327,599 of the amount claimed under section 0000 for DefendantCC Industry Development to E;

claim for rent under the instant lease agreement held by the company is subject to seizure and collection order.

was received.

5) Defendant KimG, on November 26, 2010, filed a claim with Suwon District Court Decision 2010 Tasan0000.

An amount of KRW 2,100,000,000, which is equivalent to the development of the DefendantCC industry, the lease claim under the instant lease agreement held by DD against Defendant B and the rent after the termination of the lease.

The seizure and collection order was issued with respect to the claim for return of unjust enrichment.

6) Defendant Hah and 52 other than Defendant Hah are the designated parties to Defendant Hah on March 15, 201, with the claim amounting to KRW 7,280,973,688, totaling the amount claimed under the instant lease agreement that Defendant CC Industry Development and D had against Defendant B as the designated parties to the instant contract with the Suwon District Court was KRW 201,000.

was issued with respect to the seizure and collection order.

7) On January 28, 2011, the Defendant H head of Suwon District Court’s claim amounting to KRW 2011 Trith 0000.

The amount shall be KRW 162,779,200, and the development of the DefendantCC industry shall have respect to Defendant B.

The claim for rent under the instant lease agreement was issued with the seizure and collection order.

(e) Disposition on default on deposit of rent and claim for payment of deposit money, seizure of claims, etc.;

1) If Defendant BB pays rent to the lessor, Defendant CW real estate trust seeking a return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent against Defendant BB, then Defendant BB may not be paid to anyone who is the difference because it is the risk of double payment of rent, and it cannot be known that Defendant CW real estate trust should be paid to anyone.

The amount equivalent to the rent from September 2008 to November 2008 under the instant lease agreement by title 2987

147,568,959 won was deposited (hereinafter referred to as "the first deposit of this case").

2) On March 20, 2012, the Defendant B had Suwon District Court No. 2010 Tasan Branch 19141

In addition to the addition of Defendant Kim Young-si and 201TTTT 201TT 3769, the head of HH and 52 other than the 201T 1926 under the same support, Defendant Kim Jong-si and the 201TT 1) deposited KRW 134,623,647 equivalent to the difference between December 2008 and February 2, 2009 under the above lease agreement with the head of Suwon District Court as depositee for the development of theCC industry, D or W real estate trust, or the Plaintiff as depositee for the same reason as set forth in the above 1).

3) On December 20, 2010, the director of the Ansan District Tax Office: (a) the total of DefendantCC Industry Development KRW 6,164,519,760.

Defendant DD’s failure to pay national taxes of KRW 8,868,264,310 in total; and

W real estate trust can only be subject to prior consent, and the lease deposit shall be subject to case.

Article 9 provides that a non-real estate trust shall be paid to the non-real estate trust, and the conclusion of the instant trust agreement

subsequent lease or re-lease contract can only be approved by the defendant W real estate trust.

In addition, the lease deposit must be paid to the defendant W real estate trust.

Article 7-2(2) of the Special Agreement on Real Estate Management Trust Contract among the instant trust contract

The contract on mountain-related development provides that DefendantCC industry development and D shall obtain the consent of the second priority beneficiary (the second priority beneficiary). Paragraph (3) of the same Article provides that DefendantCC industry development and D shall notify Defendant W real estate trust upon the conclusion of the contract on the trust real estate.

at the same time, the original of the contract shall be delivered to the defendant W real estate trust, and the lease shall be made

The deposit should be deposited into the account as stipulated in this special agreement. Furthermore, the deposit should be deposited into the account.

Section 4 of the same Article shall apply to the development of the DefendantCC industry, and D shall enter into a lease agreement on trust property.

with respect to all the terms or conditions or contract terms, the lender shall obtain prior written consent of the bank

In addition, it is stipulated that the lender should comply with the special direction of the lender.

3) The lease price of the real estate held in trust under the instant trust agreement by DefendantCC Industry Development, and DD

Whether the requirements for approval are satisfied or not

In light of the terms and conditions of the instant trust agreement, in order for DefendantCC Industry Development and D to lease trust real estate to a third party, Defendant W real estate trust, a trustee,

(2) The consent of the plaintiff who is the first beneficiary of the construction interest and the second priority shall be obtained.

(3) It can be known that in advance consent is required of all the terms and conditions of the lease contract from the bank that is the lender of the loan.

As seen earlier, DefendantCC Industry Development and DD did not obtain prior consent from Defendant WW real estate trust regarding the instant lease agreement. Moreover, the Plaintiff leased its own share of VVVT on the condition that the instant lease agreement and the building site were leased to the O, as seen earlier, but solely on its own, the Plaintiff was in the instant commercial building.

W. It seems that he consented to the conclusion of the instant lease agreement on the part owned by W real estate trust

Furthermore, it is difficult to conclude all the terms and conditions of the instant lease agreement by the Gyeongnam Bank, a lender.

There is no evidence to acknowledge that prior consent was given.

Therefore, as DefendantCC Industry Development and D and EE do not meet the requirements to permit the conclusion of the instant commercial building lease agreement under the instant trust agreement, it cannot be asserted that the instant lease agreement on Defendant W real estate trust is valid.

4) Sub-committee

In light of this point, in relation to the relationship between the defendant W real estate trust and the defendant WB, the part of the ownership of the defendant W real estate trust among the commercial buildings of this case was occupied and used without permission. Thus, the defendant W real estate trust bears the obligation to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent to the defendant W real estate trust, and if the damage was incurred by the defendant W real estate trust, the compensation is also liable. Each deposit of this case deposited by the defendant BB for unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent or rent for the commercial building of this case.

W real estate trust to EE and Defendant B from W real estate trust, the amount equivalent to the above rent

It should be attributed to the Plaintiff who acquired the right to claim restitution of unjust enrichment.

Therefore, the Plaintiff and the Republic of Korea have the right to claim the return of the instant deposit No. 1 between the Plaintiff and the Republic of Korea. In addition, the Plaintiff and the Republic of Korea have the right to claim the return of the instant deposit. In order for the Plaintiff to receive the payment of each of the instant deposit, it is necessary to obtain a confirmation judgment that the instant claim for the return of the deposit belongs to the Plaintiff, since it is necessary to obtain a confirmation judgment against the remaining Defendants, which

4. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is decided as per the disposition.

(c)

March 20, 2015

April 17, 2015

1. On July 15, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Republic of Korea confirmed that the Defendant BB deposited KRW 147,568,959, which was deposited by the Suwon District Court No. 2987 in Geumwon District Court for the year 2010. 2. On March 20, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Republic of Korea confirmed that the Defendant BB deposited KRW 134,623,647, which was deposited by the Suwon District Court No. 902, the Defendant B had the right to claim the payment of deposit between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Republic of Korea.

3. The litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order of the Gu office.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. New construction of VVT and conclusion of the instant trust agreement

1) On August 1, 2002, the Plaintiff completed the construction of the new construction of the VVa shop (hereinafter referred to as the “VVa shop”) located in the unit-gu O as the unit-gu O in Ansan-si from DefendantCC Industry Development (hereinafter referred to as the “CC Industry Development”) and DD (hereinafter referred to as the “DD”). DefendantCC Industry Development and DD transferred the Plaintiff the ownership of the part of the total sectional ownership of VVVVa shop equivalent to 25.13% of the construction price under the pretext of partial payment in lieu of the construction price.

2) DefendantCC industry development, D around 2006, entrusted Defendant W real estate trust company (hereinafter “WW real estate trust company”) with the remainder, excluding the portion transferred as payment in kind to the Plaintiff, among the entire sectional ownership of VVtae Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant trust contract”). The instant trust contract consists of “the trust contract for the first real estate management” and “the special agreement for the first real estate management trust contract.” Defendant VVVPP unit buyer Co., Ltd. established, etc.

1) The number of buyers of the DefendantCC industry development, D and VVlst are the buyers of D and VVlst on July 19, 2007