A. Defendant B, C, and D jointly share KRW 35,00,000 and Defendant B and C with respect thereto from November 24, 2017.

A. On April 22, 2017, Defendant E, as a licensed real estate agent, received KRW 600,000 per month from Defendant B, C, etc., and lent his/her brokerage office registration certificate to Defendant B. Defendant B and C obtained a loan from Defendant E to operate the “H Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” in the F buildings and G of Busan Dong-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant brokerage office”) between May 10, 2017 and February 20, 2018.

B. On November 24, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B and Busan Dong-gu I building J (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and paid KRW 35,00,000,00 for the lease deposit. Defendant B entered into the said lease agreement and was an agent of K as the actual owner of the instant real estate.

C. On July 25, 2018, Defendant B and C conspired with Defendant D (location) on the charge of forging and uttering of official documents, including family relation certificates, fabrication and uttering of private documents, including power of attorney, and fraud against Plaintiff et al., Defendant E was sentenced to five years of imprisonment, six months of suspended execution, two years of probation, and one hundred and twenty hours of community service (Supreme Court Decision 2018No555 Decided January 31, 2019). Defendant B, C, and E appealed from the Busan District Court on November 9, 2018, but was sentenced to dismissal of the appeal from the Busan District Court on November 31, 2018 (Seoul District Court Decision 2018No2832), and Defendant C appealed appealed appealed appealed on the charge of violating the Licensed Real Estate Agent Act. However, the appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court on January 31, 2019.

(Supreme Court Decision 2018Do18873). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to each of the above facts finding as to the claims against Defendant B, C, and D, Defendant B, D, and C had legitimate authority without being delegated by K with the authority to conclude a charter contract, deceiving the Plaintiff as if they had legitimate authority, thereby deceiving the Plaintiff, and thus, Defendant B, D, and C shared the Plaintiff.