The plaintiffs' defendants.

G has been acting as a broker or an agent for a contract with regard to the transaction of real estate owned or managed by H since wintering in 2003.

H sold 3,200,000,000 Won (hereinafter “the down payment in this case”) and 320,000,000 Won (hereinafter “the down payment in this case”) to I, J (hereinafter referred to as “I, etc.”) on July 13, 2004 with G’s arrangement and sold the said land to others on April 20, 205.

He died on May 1, 2006 and succeeded to H’s property by C and Defendant F, his children, and thereafter C died on October 18, 2014 and succeeded to C’s property by Defendant D and E, their children.

In addition, G died on June 26, 201, and the plaintiffs, their wife and children inherited G's property.

[Grounds for recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence 1-1, and the defendants' defense prior to the purport of the whole pleadings asserted that the plaintiff's claim for reimbursement of the purchase price based on the obligee's subrogation right is unlawful because the plaintiff's claim for reimbursement of the purchase price based on the obligee's subrogation right is not identical to the basis of the claim.

In a dispute concerning the same living facts or the same economic interests, only there is a difference in the method of resolution, and the change of the purport and cause of the claim does not change the basis of the claim.

(2) The Defendants of the Plaintiffs are liable to return the contract deposit amount of KRW 320,000,000 to H, etc. on the ground that H bears the obligation to return the contract deposit of KRW 320,000,00 with respect to the above return obligation by subrogation of G, and H agrees to pay KRW 320,000,00,00,00, which is the amount of subrogated payment, to G, and the modified or added claim is primarily the above claim.