보증금반환
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 12 (including numbers with various numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence No. 1, the plaintiff deposited KRW 50 million into the defendant corporation corporation (hereinafter "the defendant corporation") on August 30, 2017, and then paid approximately KRW 5 million out of the defendant corporation's account from around February 2018 to around February 2018; paid KRW 2 million on March 30, 2018; around April 30, the defendant Eul and non-party D accepted KRW 156,43,544 with respect to the residual music points between the defendant company and the defendant company on April 30, 2017; and entered into a contract with the defendant corporation on May 28, 201 with the head of the headquarters to entrust the defendant corporation with the use of the marina house and fixtures, while paying KRW 10,000 per month rent to the defendant company.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The parties’ assertion (1) Plaintiff B and Nonparty D entrusted the management of Defendant E-Mart points to the Plaintiff while requesting the Plaintiff to participate.
Therefore, on August 30, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million to the Defendant Company’s account as a security deposit, and served as the Defendant Company Empt shop from around that time to April 15, 2018, and the entrusted management is terminated. Therefore, the Defendant Company, the title holder of which was promised to return the security deposit, is jointly and severally liable to return the security deposit amount of KRW 50 million.
(2) The Defendants asserted that Defendant B’s money deposited by the Plaintiff was an investment necessary for joint consignment management, and that the amount to be settled is not in excess of the amount to be settled since the termination of the contractual relationship with the Defendant Company, and that the Defendant Company did not have the money paid as a security deposit.
B. First of all, as to the claim that KRW 50 million deposited by the Plaintiff to the account of the Defendant Company is a security deposit, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company and the Defendant B, unlike some of the deposit money within Eart.