1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

The reasoning of this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for adding the judgment of the Defendants on the new argument in the trial. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Additional Determination Part] The Defendants asserted that, at the time of the instant lease agreement, the causal relationship between Defendant B and C’s breach of the duty to explain and the Plaintiff’s damage is not acknowledged, since the instant multi-family house and its market value exceeds the maximum amount of priority mortgage and the aggregate amount of priority lease deposit, and thus, Defendant B and C confirmed the existence of senior lessee and the deposit for lease, and provided explanation to the Plaintiff, even if so, the Plaintiff concluded the instant lease agreement.

However, just because of the circumstances alleged by the Defendants, it cannot be readily concluded that the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the knowledge of the existence of senior lessee and the deposit for lease. Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

Thus, the judgment of the court of first instance is justified, and all appeals by the defendants are dismissed as they are without merit.