1. Defendant B:

(a) Of the real property in the attached list of the first floor, the current status of the building in the attached sheet shall also be stated 1,2,3,4,5,6,00.

1. On November 15, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 720,000 (payment on January 15), and two years with respect to the instant store.

Defendant D on November 15, 2015, “Person B, Person D to whom the case is delegated, or Person D to whom the case is delegated: It shall be delegated with all of the powers on the store in this case. (Additional Matters)

1. A promise to restore a store to its original state by December 31, 2015;

2. At the time of completion of the restoration of the store to its original state, the power of attorney stating that “2.5 million won for the amount guaranteed by the store shall be remitted to the remittance key” was awarded to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Class A 1, 4, and 5, respectively. 2. Determination

A. Inasmuch as the term of the above lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B on the claim against Defendant B was expired, Defendant B agreed to restore the store to its original state by December 31, 2015, the Defendant B is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff via Defendant D.

Although the Plaintiff and Defendant B agreed on March 19, 2015 on a lease agreement, they asserted that in relation to the duty to restore the building, the transfer of the building to Defendant C as a substitute for the duty to restore the building to the original state, there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

The defendant D has a duty to deliver the store only with the lease deposit simultaneously.

However, there is no need to separately determine the remainder of the lease deposit as the Defendant B’s assertion. However, in light of the fact that the power of attorney prepared as of November 15, 2015 prepared the remainder of the lease deposit as of KRW 2.5 million, and as seen below, Defendant B did not pay the remainder of the lease deposit as of November 15, 2015, it is difficult to deem that the lease deposit of Defendant

Even if Defendant D as his own right is asserted, as seen in the judgment on Defendant D, Defendant D is not a party to the lease agreement, and Defendant D No. 4 is not a party to the lease agreement.