1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

On April 24, 2006, the plaintiff asserted by the parties concerned entered into a lease agreement between the defendants and the 3 and 4th floor of the E-building located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter "the building of this case") with the 1 billion won lease deposit (hereinafter "the lease agreement of this case") and paid a total of 47 billion won including the down payment of 50 million won out of the lease deposit by March 15, 2007.

However, the Defendants leased and delivered the instant building to another person on July 2008 without delivering it to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the Defendants’ nonperformance. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 457 million, including KRW 47 million and penalty for breach of contract deposit equivalent to KRW 57 million.

The Defendants’ assertion that the instant lease agreement was concluded by F with the Defendants by lending the Plaintiff’s name. In fact, F invested to operate a private house in the instant building in the same manner with the Defendants. Therefore, the Plaintiff is not the actual party that paid the lease deposit to the Defendants.

Judgment

In full view of the purport of the arguments in Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) as a whole, the following facts are as follows: (a) as of April 24, 2006 between the plaintiff and G and the defendants, the lease contract was made between the plaintiff and G to lease the building of this case from the defendants; (b) on May 2, 2006, the defendant Eul issued a receipt of KRW 200 million after the intermediate payment of the lease deposit to the plaintiff and G; (c) on May 19, 2006, on June 21, 2006, the receipt for the repayment of KRW 200 million out of the loan amount of KRW 50 million to the plaintiff; and (d) on June 21, 2006, the receipt for the repayment of KRW 125 million out of the loan amount of KRW 30 million under the name of the plaintiff; and (d) on November 15, 2006, the receipts for safety diagnosis were issued to the plaintiff.