2. All the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff leased No. 103 of the Seocho-gu Seoul E-Ba 103 to keep the goods (hereinafter “instant goods”) therein in the name of D.

On August 27, 2010, the deposit in arrears continued to be deducted, and requested D to deduct the room, and D requested D to pay KRW 600,000 of the storage fees for six months, upon requesting Defendant C, who operates the Center of Lee Jae-on, to keep the water in this case, and Defendant C entrusted Defendant C with the custody of the water in the Fware operated by Defendant B.

D paid more than six months after the late payment of storage fees, but later, the storage fees were in arrears.

Accordingly, Defendant B did not destroy or properly manage the object of this case on the grounds of the unpaid storage fees.

B. As such, D stolen or embezzled the instant goods owned by the Plaintiff, and Defendant C arbitrarily requested Defendant B to keep the goods as stolen, and Defendant B failed to destroy or keep the goods properly on the ground that the storage charge was not paid even after the storage charge was not paid. Therefore, the Defendants are liable to compensate for the amount of KRW 57 million equivalent to the value of the instant goods.

2. As to whether the judgment and conclusion D stolens or embezzled the instant goods, it is not sufficient to recognize the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case is without merit without any further review as to the remaining issues.