1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

1. The defendant's judgment on the main defense of this safety defense was made to the effect that the plaintiff's claim of this case should be dismissed on the grounds of illegality and defects in the litigation requirements under the Civil Procedure Act, and thus, the defendant did not assert the grounds for the defects in the specific litigation requirements.

In addition, even if the defendant's assertion that the plaintiff has no standing to sue, the standing to sue in the lawsuit for performance is the person who asserts that the plaintiff has the right to demand performance, which is the subject matter of the lawsuit, and whether the plaintiff actually has the right to demand performance or not, it is obvious that the lawsuit in this case constitutes the lawsuit for performance, and the issue of whether the plaintiff has the standing to sue and the right to demand performance against the defendant is determined within the scope of the lawsuit.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's main defense.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. Basic facts 1) The Defendant’s husband D is the Defendant’s husband D on March 11, 2013, E apartment 644 Dong 1003 (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

2) As to the lease deposit, the lease agreement to be leased to C is determined from April 2, 2013 to April 2, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the lease deposit amounting to KRW 280 million and the period from April 2, 2013 to April 2, 2015.

C. On April 2, 2013, upon delivery of the above apartment on the same month, C paid the lease deposit to D.

3. A move-in report shall be completed; and

2) On March 6, 2014, the Defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the shares of 1/2 of the instant apartment, which was issued by Suwon District Court (Seoul District Court No. 36956, Mar. 5, 2014; 3) D’s heir, including the Defendant, jointly inherited the remainder 1/2 of the instant apartment that was owned by the networkD on March 29, 2014 by inheritance shares, but the heir was adjudicated to accept each report of limited recognition of inheritance by Suwon District Court No. 2014Mo1387.

(2).