1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the defendants added the following judgments as to the matters alleged in the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The Defendants asserted that the leased object of this case was delivered, and the lessor installed the shower call and the facilities for prevention of harsh suspicion in the sum of KRW 13 million with the lessor’s consent.

Therefore, the Defendants exercise the right to purchase the attached article against the Plaintiff. The Defendants cannot comply with the request for extradition of the leased article of this case until the aforementioned purchase price is paid in KRW 13 million.

B. In the event that the lease contract is terminated due to the lessee’s default, the lessee does not have the right to purchase the attached object under Article 646 of the Civil Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Meu7245, 7252, Jan. 23, 190). As seen earlier, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated by the Plaintiff due to the Defendants’ failure to pay the increased deposit, so the Defendants cannot exercise the right to purchase the attached object.

Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendants is without merit.

3. As such, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted in its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendants' appeal is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit.