1. Defendant C shall pay the Plaintiffs KRW 220,000,000.

2. The plaintiffs' remaining claims against Defendant C and the defendant.

1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;

2. Articles 208 (3) 2 and 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts (a judgment on whether to be deemed as a foreigner);

3. The Plaintiffs partially dismissed claim against Defendant C for the delayed payment of KRW 220,000,000 from the day following the delivery date of a copy of the instant complaint to the day of full payment.

However, Defendant C’s obligation to return the lease deposit and the Plaintiff’s obligation to deliver the instant real estate are in simultaneous performance relationship. Unless there is any assertion or proof as to whether the Plaintiffs performed or provided the above obligation to deliver the lease deposit, it cannot be said that Defendant C was omitted from the delay of performance in relation to the above obligation to return the lease deposit.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim for late payment damages against the defendant C is without merit.

On the other hand, the plaintiffs primarily asserted that Defendant C is the actual contractual party to a lease agreement on the instant real estate with the plaintiffs and sought the return of the lease deposit and the payment of damages for delay thereof against the defendant C. In preparation for the case where Defendant C is not recognized as the contractual party, the plaintiffs are claiming the return of the lease deposit and the payment of damages for delay against the defendant C.

However, as long as the primary defendant C is recognized as the actual contractual party to the above lease agreement, the claim against the primary defendant D who is not compatible is without merit.