1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 12, 2013, Nonparty C, a trust real estate (hereinafter “instant building”), changed the name of the Company E from “F,” a truster, to “Co., Ltd.” (hereinafter “E”), which is the representative director of “Co., Ltd.” (hereinafter “E”), Nonparty C, a real estate agent, and the Plaintiff seeking to open a pharmacy under the brokerage of the Defendant, a licensed real estate agent, for a monthly period of KRW 102 (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) KRW 5,500,000,000,000 for a fixed period of 18 months (hereinafter “instant lease”), and received in advance as rent, KRW 9.9 million,00,000,000,000 from March 12, 2013 to May 23, 2013.

B. However, E cannot enter into a lease agreement on the instant building without the prior consent of an international trust company (hereinafter “international trust”) which is a trust company as a trustee under a trust agreement, and concluded a trust agreement with a trust company without the prior consent of the trust company. As such, the Plaintiff cannot claim the validity of the said lease agreement on an international trust.

C. C refers to the Plaintiff, “In the case of the instant commercial building, a trustee may not enter into a lease agreement that receives a security deposit and premium without obtaining prior consent from an international trust company, which is a trust company. However, there is no legal problem regarding a lease agreement that only receives a security deposit without a security deposit. The sub-lease may be placed without obtaining the consent of an international trust company. The monthly rent shall be KRW 5,500,000,000 for 18 months, and the monthly rent shall be KRW 99,000,000,000 for 18 months if the first payment is made, will be made able to be made available without any problem for 18 months.” The Seoul Central District Court was indicted as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Ra6728, Nov. 6, 2015.