1. Defendant B pays to the Plaintiff KRW 35,000,000.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant C is dismissed.

3...

1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

(a)be as shown in the attachment of the claim;

(b) Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. (1) On February 1, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the terms that leases KRW 35 million as deposit money, and the term of lease from February 25, 2013 to February 24, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

(2) Defendant C entered into the instant lease contract on behalf of the Defendant B.

(3) The Plaintiff is occupying and using the instant real estate after paying the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement.

(4) On the other hand, on April 28, 2015, a voluntary decision to commence the auction was rendered to Chuncheon District CourtE regarding the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 3, purport of whole pleadings.

B. The Plaintiff asserted and determined that the lease deposit of this case is returned jointly and severally with the lessor Defendant B.

On the other hand, Defendant C is an agent who is not a party to the instant lease agreement. Therefore, Defendant C’s claim for the return of deposit premised on the premise that it is a party to the instant lease agreement is without merit.

Although the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that Defendant C agreed to return the lease deposit of this case, there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant C is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified, and the claim against the defendant C is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.