2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. On July 8, 2013, Plaintiff A entered into a lease agreement with D, representing the Defendant’s representative, with respect to the lease deposit for KRW 10,000,000 and the term of July 8, 2015, with respect to the underground F of the third-story Housing Building on the ground of the third-story Housing (hereinafter “Lease Building”) located in Heung-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Plaintiff B entered into a lease agreement with D, representing G or the Defendant’s agent, with respect to the lease deposit for KRW 20,00,000 and the term of lease from December 15, 2011 to December 15, 2013.

B. As of July 8, 2015, Plaintiff A and Plaintiff B, as of December 15, 2013, respectively, concluded the instant lease agreement. The Plaintiffs terminate the lease agreement to the Defendant and seek the return of the deposit.

[Grounds for recognition] Class A evidence 1, 5, 7, 8, 13 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) plaintiffs' assertion (including plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claim) concluded the instant lease agreement with D, G, and H, the representative of the defendant, and paid the lease deposit. Since the above lease agreement expired and delivered the leased building of this case, the above lease agreement was delivered, the defendant must return each lease deposit to the plaintiffs. In particular, the plaintiff Gap agreed to pay the amount of KRW 40,000,000 to the plaintiff Eul with the amount of 20,000,000 as delayed compensation in the event that the lease deposit is not returned to the expiration date. Thus, the defendant did not have concluded the instant lease agreement with the plaintiff, and D or G, and H did not have a legitimate representative or representative of the defendant, and the defendant's lease agreement of this case.