1. Defendant C shall deliver to Defendant D the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2. Defendant D, Inc.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 26, 2015, Defendant C entered into a lease agreement with Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) to lease the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) with a deposit of KRW 25,030,000, monthly rent of KRW 162,500, and the period from February 23, 2015 to February 22, 2016 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”). Around that time, Defendant C received KRW 25,030,000 from the Defendant Company by paying a deposit of KRW 25,00,000 from the Defendant Company.

B. On January 7, 2019, the Plaintiff was issued a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) with respect to KRW 28,975,434, out of the lease deposit return claim against Defendant C, by virtue of the title of the payment order in the Chuncheon District Court’s territorial branch of the Chuncheon District Court’s 2015 tea 680 loan loan case against Defendant C as the title of execution. The instant collection order was served on the Defendant Company, which was the third debtor on January 11, 2019.

C. The written determination of the collection order of this case states that “The small amount of deposit that cannot be seized pursuant to Article 246(1)6 of the Civil Execution Act (excluding the deposit that the debtor is preferentially reimbursed under Article 8 of the Housing Lease Protection Act and Article 10(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Lease Protection Act) is excluded from the seizure claim

[Ground of recognition] between the plaintiff and the defendant C: The fact that there is no dispute between the plaintiff of confession and the defendant company: the entries in Gap's 1 to 3, Eul's 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the claim against the defendant C, since the contract of this case terminated upon the expiration of the term of validity, the defendant C is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the defendant company, and the plaintiff is entitled to seek implementation on behalf of the defendant company, as the collection right holder of the claim to return the lease deposit of this case against the defendant company.

3. Determination as to the claim against the defendant company

(a)the cause of the claim;