1. C’s claim for withdrawal of KRW 108,316,880 deposited by the Seoul Southern District Court No. 396 on January 25, 2017.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed as the same.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 29, 2016, Defendant B leased No. 101, 205, Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Apartment No. 101, 205, and paid the lease deposit KRW 115 million.

B. On September 2, 2016, Defendant B transferred to the Plaintiff a claim listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “claim Refund Claim”) for the repayment of KRW 128.9 million to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”) and sent a content-certified mail to the Plaintiff on September 6, 2016, giving notice of the assignment of claim to C.

The above content-certified mail reached C on September 7, 2016.

C. On December 14, 2016, the Defendant Credit Guarantee Fund (Seoul Western District Court 2016Kadan53529) received a provisional attachment order for KRW 57.5 million out of the instant security deposit refund claim against Defendant B as the claim amounting to KRW 57.5 million due to the revocation of the fraudulent act against Defendant B, and the said provisional attachment order was served to C, the garnishee on December 16, 2016.

C On the ground that the notification of the transfer of claims competes with the notification of provisional attachment, and that the validity of the notification of provisional attachment cannot be determined due to dispute over the validity of the transfer of claims, the notification of provisional attachment cannot be determined, etc., on January 25, 2017, the deposited person was indicated as “Defendant B or the Plaintiff,” and the statutory provisions as “Articles 487 and 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act,” respectively, and deposited KRW 108,316,880 (hereinafter referred to as the “deposit”). from August 20, 2016 to January 23, 2017, the deposited amount was 3,870,870 won in arrears, and the repair cost of Shari-si, 200,000 won, management expenses, 1,96,750 won, 645,570 won in city gas expenses, 645,570 won.

[Ground for Recognition] Defendant B: The defendant Credit Guarantee Fund (Article 150(1) and (3) of the Civil Procedure Act): The facts that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the principal claim.