1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B shall be KRW 15,515,698 and KRW 15,344,714 among them.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that delegated the right to occupy and use the shopping mall of an underground shopping mall located in Seoul E Group (hereinafter “instant shopping mall”) by Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant shopping mall”).

On February 25, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for commencing rehabilitation procedures with the Seoul Central District Court 2014hap32, and received a decision on March 24, 2014.

In the above procedure, as of March 31, 2014, investigation reports were prepared at approximately KRW 3.6 billion in case of the plaintiff's assets, and KRW 63.4 billion in case of the debt.

On February 2, 2015, the rehabilitation court rendered a decision to abolish the rehabilitation plan before authorization pursuant to Articles 286(1)1 and 231 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act on the grounds that the execution of the rehabilitation plan is impossible and it constitutes grounds for exclusion of the rehabilitation plan.

B. (1) On November 12, 2012, Defendant B entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff on each of the following terms: (a) the lease deposit for KRW 518,930,00, monthly rent of KRW 64,000/m20 (based on exclusive use area for year 201, separate tax), the lease term of KRW 64,000/m2 (a year from the date of completion, and one year from the date of occupancy) with regard to subparagraph 114 among the instant commercial buildings; (b) around that time, Defendant B entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff,

(2) On March 2, 2011, F entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff, which provides that 130 units of the instant commercial building shall be KRW 518,930,00, monthly rent of KRW 64,000, monthly rent of KRW 600, and the lease term shall be “one year from the date of completion, occupancy,” and the lease term shall be “one year from the date of completion,” respectively.

G From the F on July 28, 2011, Defendant C succeeded to the lessee status of each of the instant shopping districts 130 from G on November 3, 2013, and the employee prior to completion of construction of the instant shopping districts was issued on October 6, 201, while Defendant C was transferred from G and operated a store up to the present day.

The term "the lease contract between the plaintiff and the defendants is collectively named," respectively.