Defendant C delivers to Defendant C a building listed in the attached Form to Defendant C, an incorporated association.

The plaintiff's defendant D.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 1, 201, Defendant C leased a building listed in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant building”) from Defendant D, a corporate body, (hereinafter “D”) with the term fixed the lease deposit of KRW 1,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 100,000, and the term of lease of KRW 2 years (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The lease of this case was implicitly renewed on July 1, 2013.

B. On April 11, 2018, the Seoul Central District Court 2014Gaso579638 decided performance recommendation order against Defendant C, the Plaintiff received a claim attachment and collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) as to KRW 3,000,000, out of the lease deposit repayment claim against Defendant C by the Jeonju District Court 2018TT as to April 11, 2018. The instant collection order was served on Defendant D on April 18, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In a case where the obligee who received the claim for the return of the lease deposit generally determined as to the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant C needs to first perform the lessee’s delivery of the leased building in order to claim the performance thereof, the obligee may seek an explanation against the lessee by subrogation of the lessor on behalf of the lessor, regardless of the lessor’s financial ability (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Meu4253, 4260, Apr. 25, 1989). This legal principle applies to the obligee subject to the seizure and collection order regarding the claim for the return of the lease deposit. In this case, in order to seek the delivery of the leased building to the lessee, the lease contract should be terminated under the preceding condition. The Plaintiff expressed his intention to request the Defendant D to inform the Defendant of the building in subrogation of the Plaintiff by the suit of this case, and the said declaration of intention as to the lease contract of this case, which was implicitly renewed.