1. For the plaintiffs:

A. Defendant D received KRW 30,000,000 from the Plaintiffs and at the same time F. of Jung-Eup.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 28, 2013, the Plaintiffs: (a) to I on July 28, 2013, among Class 1 and Class 2 neighborhood living facilities on the 4th floor of the F reinforced concrete hub roof 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 17 square meters in the attached drawings (hereinafter “instant building”) of the third floor H heading 177 square meters in the part inside the ship connecting each point of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 1; (b) from September 1, 2013 to August 31, 2015; and (c) determined to be paid in advance at the end of each month.

B. I made a business registration under the name of Defendant C, who is his spouse, and operated the skin beauty business under the trade name of “J”.

C. On May 1, 2014, the Plaintiffs, at the request of I during the lease period, rescinded the above lease agreement, and concluded a lease agreement with Defendant D and the instant building that became known through I as I on the same day, from May 1, 2014 to April 30, 2016, and from April 1, 2016 to April 1, 2016, on the condition that the lease agreement was concluded by stipulating that Defendant D and the instant building shall be paid in advance on the last day of each month.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). D.

Defendant D used the business registration in the name of Defendant C, and operated the above part-time shop as it takes over from I.

E. On March 23, 2015, the Plaintiffs notified Defendant D of the termination of the instant lease agreement on the ground that the instant lease agreement was terminated for three months from January 2015 to March 2015.

F. On June 2015 and August 2015, the Plaintiff’s account was deposited into Defendant E’s account in the name of the Plaintiff, and around October 2015, Defendant D requested the Plaintiffs to conclude a lease agreement under Defendant E’s name.

However, the Plaintiffs refused such request of Defendant D, and did not reach an agreement in the course of consultation on the new terms and conditions of lease with Defendant E. In the end, Defendant D, on May 2, 2016, after the expiration of the lease term, did not enter into a new lease contract.