1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the Plaintiff, which orders additional payment, shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the part " from the part " of the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance" to the part "as follows," and therefore, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Attachment] However, the Defendants asserted that the amount of debt regarding the D field is KRW 32,026,116 (i.e., rent and loss loss incurred after settlement of KRW 30,000,000 after settlement of accounts, and KRW 2,026,116). The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff should deduct KRW 15,00,000 in total, including KRW 10,000 and deposit KRW 5,000,000,000.

2. In conclusion, the Defendants jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 27,026,116 won (i.e., the amount of debt 32,026,116 won - deposit 5,000,000 won) and 25,000,000 won cited in the judgment of the first instance (i.e., the date following the last delivery of the complaint of this case). From July 10, 2014 to April 29, 2015, which is the date when the judgment of the first instance is rendered, to dispute over the existence and scope of the Defendants’ performance obligation, 5% per annum under the Civil Act, and 2,026,116 won, which is the date following the last delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the Plaintiff, and 30% per annum from the day following July 10, 2014 to the date of full payment under the Civil Act.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and each claim is justified, and all of them shall be dismissed.

However, part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff is unfair, and thus, the plaintiff's appeal is partially accepted.