1. The defendant's KRW 100 million against the plaintiff A and 5% per annum from July 31, 2008 to August 23, 2016.

1. Judgment on the plaintiffs' assertion

A. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be found in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3-1 to 12 by integrating the purpose of the entire pleadings:

(1) On May 29, 2008, the Defendant: (a) on November 9, 2007, the Plaintiff requested that the Plaintiff pay KRW 200 million under the name of the re-subcontract of the aforementioned removal work; (b) on May 29, 2008, the Plaintiff concluded a subcontract for the construction work with the Defendant for the removal of KRW 130,00 won per square year, and KRW 130,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000.

(2) The plaintiff A as of June 27, 2008 and as of June 27, 2008

7. Each of the 31. 50 million won paid a total of KRW 100 million, and the Plaintiff B paid a total of KRW 100 million from May 29, 2008 to October 29 of the same year.

(3) However, the contract for removal of construction works executed on November 9, 2007 between Ltsts Korea and D was cancelled on December 2007 due to D’s failure to pay a security deposit for construction works.

Accordingly, the defendant was prosecuted on October 23, 2009, Incheon District Court 2009Kadan5439 (Consolidation in the case of 2008 Gooman7071) on the ground that "the defendant has received money of KRW 179 million from the plaintiffs as a contract deposit without any intention or ability to re-subcontract the removal work with the plaintiffs under the status that the contract was already invalidated on November 9, 2007 with Liz Korea and D, and acquired it by transfer from the plaintiffs as a contract deposit without any intention or ability to re-subcontract the removal work." On June 3, 2010, the defendant is different from the above court.