1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court is as follows: (a) each of the "Defendant B" in Paragraph (1) of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is "B"; and (b) the third side "Defendant C" in the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the "1. Recognition" in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the "Defendant C" is deemed "C"; and (c) thus,

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff C transferred the right to return the lease deposit of this case to the defendant and did not have the right to return the lease deposit of this case. However, under the premise that C had the right to return the lease deposit of KRW 30,000,000, in the auction procedure of this case, under the premise that C had the right to return the lease deposit of KRW 22,000,000, and the claim for the payment of KRW 8,000,000 was made to the creditor B based on an invalid assignment order. The defendant sent the amount of KRW 18,010,717 based on the above dividends to C. The above dividends are all null and void. Since the plaintiff, the real estate owner due to the above erroneous dividends, caused damages for which the above amount of surplus equivalent to the above amount was not paid, the defendant did not have the right to return the deposit money received by the court of execution after being distributed to C in the above distribution procedure, even if the defendant did not have the right to return the lease deposit of this case to the creditor of this case.