1. The part concerning the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the defendant shall be modified as follows.

Plaintiff

The plaintiff's successor is the primary part of the plaintiff's successor.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation as to this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the respective corresponding parts of the judgment of the court of first instance are cited or added as follows. Thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The following shall be added to Chapter 4 12:

A person shall be appointed.

E. On April 4, 2019, the Plaintiff transferred the entire claim owned by the Plaintiff to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff in relation to the instant case. On July 26, 2019, the Plaintiff, the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, delegated the right to notify the assignment of claim from the Defendant, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claim as above.

On August 16, 2019, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor applied for intervention in succession to this court.

In Part 4, the phrase “B” in Part 14 was added to the phrase “B” in Part 14 “B” with the phrase “IB evidence Nos. 2, C. 1 and 2.” The following is added to the phrase “non-Evidence” in Part 5 of Part 13. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff cancelled the contract as of April 13, 2015 (hereinafter “the transfer and takeover contract of this case”) which was concluded on April 13, 2015 to acquire the obligation to return the sub-lease deposit with respect to all auxiliary facilities, including KRW 180,000,000,000,000,0000,0000,000 won in the storage of this case from the Defendant.

However, the transfer and acquisition contract of this case constitutes a fraudulent act performed for the purpose of evading obligations.

There is no evidence to deem that the judgment of winning the lawsuit for revocation of the fraudulent act regarding the transfer or acquisition contract of this case was rendered by filing a lawsuit against the defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff's succeeding intervenor's above assertion is without merit.

A person shall be appointed.

2. The conclusion is that the main and ancillary claims of this case against the plaintiff and the succeeding intervenor against the defendant are dismissed. Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is reversed.