1. Defendant B and C shall be named as “A”, “B”, “C”, “D,” and “A”, among the first floor of the building listed in the separate sheet.

1. In full view of the facts that there is no dispute over claims against Defendant B, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including household numbers), and the purport of the entire pleadings, on September 30, 2015, Defendant C entered into a lease agreement with Defendant D with Defendant D with the following: (a) indication of building drawings Nos. 1, 2, 3, 44, and 49m2 (a) connected each point of the (b) inside the ship; (c) the lease deposit was 40,00,000, and the term of lease was 11, 2015 to November 10, 2017; (d) the lease agreement was concluded between Defendant C and the above owner of the leased property was 40,000,000,000 won; and (e) the Plaintiff claimed for the return of the lease deposit to Defendant C40,500,000,000 won; and (e) the Plaintiff’s claim for adjustment against the above Defendant C40,010.

Even though the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that the claim for the return of the above lease deposit cannot be seen as having been acquired by transfer, in full view of the purport of the entire arguments as seen earlier, the lessee on the disposal document lease contract is Defendant C, Defendant C prepared the lease contract with Defendant D, Defendant C paid the lease deposit from the account in the name of Defendant C, and Defendant D entered into a lease contract with the lessor as Defendant B, unlike the entry of the “Lessee” in the instant lease agreement, which is the disposal document.