A. On December 7, 2011, the Plaintiffs entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the deposit amount of KRW 230,000,000 and the term of lease from January 31, 2012 to January 30, 2014 with the content that the Defendant shall lease the D Apartment 105, 101 (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. Accordingly, on January 10, 2014, when the Defendant paid deposit amount of KRW 230 million to the Plaintiffs, and resided in the instant apartment, the Defendant agreed to conclude a contract with the Plaintiffs to rent the instant apartment from May 31, 2014 to the effect that the deposit amount would be increased to KRW 300 million for two years from May 31, 2014, and that “the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiffs the increased deposit amount of KRW 70 million to the Plaintiffs until May 31, 2014, and if the Defendant failed to comply with the agreement, the Defendant shall order the Plaintiffs to order the instant apartment without demanding directors’ expenses.”

C. After that, the plaintiffs and the defendant decided not to extend the term of lease of the apartment of this case, but the defendant continued to reside without delivering the apartment of this case to the plaintiffs by May 31, 2014 agreed in the above special agreement clause, and left the apartment of this case around July 4, 2014.

On July 30, 2014, the Defendant sent a content-certified mail demanding the return of deposit to the Plaintiffs by notifying the Plaintiffs of the above eviction (B-3), which reached the Plaintiffs on August 1, 2014.

(8)(e)

On September 30, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiffs of the instant apartment identification number without redeeming the deposits from the Plaintiffs, and the Plaintiffs were directors of the instant apartment around October 16, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2, 3, 10, Eul 3-5, 7-10 (including provisional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. The above facts are recognized as one of the liability for damages caused by the delay of the extradition obligation.