1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 25, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the non-party 103-dong 105 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on a condition that the lease deposit is KRW 408 million and the lease term is from March 25, 2010 to March 24, 201, and thereafter, paid the full amount of the lease deposit and resided in the instant apartment.

B. After that, as the ownership of the instant apartment was transferred to the Defendant, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on February 24, 201, setting the deposit amount of KRW 55 million with respect to the instant apartment, from February 28, 2011 to February 28, 2013 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Of the above lease deposit, KRW 40.8 million was succeeded to the said lease deposit, and the Plaintiff paid the deposit amount of KRW 14.2 million increased to the Defendant.

C. Since then, in the instant apartment, the Suwon District Court D initiated the auction procedure of real estate rent to a third party and sold it to the third party, and KRW 10,693,693 as a provisional seizure authority was distributed and deposited to the Plaintiff in the distribution procedure of the above auction procedure.

On the other hand, on February 21, 2014, the Defendant filed an application for individual rehabilitation with Suwon District Court No. 2014Ga25178, and received a decision to commence individual rehabilitation on January 30, 2015 by including KRW 55 million as individual rehabilitation claims for the Plaintiff’s claim as the instant lawsuit.

E. On February 13, 2015, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-3, Eul 1's each entry, significant facts in this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff sought the return of deposit amount of KRW 55 million under the lease agreement of this case against the defendant as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case. Thus, we examine ex officio whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate.

According to Article 600(1)3 main sentence, Article 603, and Article 604 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, individual rehabilitation procedure is commenced.