1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's primary claim and the ancillary claim added by this court are all available.

On January 4, 2014, Plaintiff D, the main claim of the parties, set the deposit amount of KRW 40,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 200,000, and the lease period of KRW 200,00,00, and the lease period of KRW 1501, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

(2) The Plaintiff received a refund claim of KRW 40,000,000 from D on January 4, 2014. The Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the assignment of the above lease deposit. As such, the Defendant paid KRW 40,00,000 to the Plaintiff the said lease deposit.

Even if the Defendant and D did not enter into a lease agreement of KRW 40,000,000, the Defendant did not respond to the Plaintiff’s notice of assignment of claims and the request for payment, and actively defend D.

In light of the fact that the defendant and D have asserted that the amount of security deposit is different from the fact late, it seems that they conspired with each other to evade the plaintiff's claim.

Therefore, the defendant should pay to the plaintiff the amount equivalent to KRW 40,000,000 as damages arising from joint tort with D.

Defendant did not prepare a lease contract of KRW 40,000,000 on January 4, 2014.

On December 20, 2013, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement (No. 1-1; hereinafter referred to as “lease agreement of December 20, 2013”) with D to lease the instant apartment with the term from January 22, 2014 to January 21, 2016, and received KRW 5,000,000 from D.

Therefore, the claims for return of lease deposit, which the plaintiff claimed to have been acquired, do not exist as a claim based on the lease agreement of January 4, 2014, which is a false contract.

The defendant and D have "in the lease contract of December 20, 2013".