2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

A. Defendant C is co-owners with the share of 2/3 of the F building No. 305 (hereinafter “instant building”) at the time of Pakistan in Gyeonggi-do, and the share of 1/3 of the said building.

B. On June 2015, Defendant C and D drafted to Defendant B a power of attorney and a certificate of personal seal impression to the effect that “a person who designates Defendant B as his agent and delegates all acts to receive any balance including lease contract and deposit for the instant building.”

C. On December 22, 2015, Defendant B entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to lease the instant building on behalf of Defendant C and D, setting the lease deposit of KRW 65,00,000,00 from February 1, 2016 to February 1, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and Defendant E as a licensed real estate agent.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 65,00,000 to Defendant B, and used the instant building from February 1, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. Although Defendant B did not receive the power of representation regarding the lease agreement from Defendant C and D, Defendant B deceiving the Plaintiff as if there were the power of representation, and acquired the deposit amount of KRW 65,00,000 by deceiving the Plaintiff, and Defendant E breached its duty as a broker.

Therefore, the above Defendants are liable to compensate each Plaintiff for the total sum of KRW 70,000,000,000,000.

B. According to the evidence Nos. 4, 5, and 6, following the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant C and D, a lessor, a lessor, a document verifying the content of “whether the Plaintiff has delegated the authority to conclude the instant lease agreement to the Defendant B.” Accordingly, the Defendant C, who prepared the instant lease agreement to the Plaintiff, lost its validity.