1. The Defendants pay to the Plaintiff KRW 110,000,000.

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

3.Paragraph 1.

1. On September 10, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendants, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000, and the term of lease from October 7, 2016 to October 6, 2018, stipulating that the third floor E (hereinafter “instant house”) among the multi-family houses with the fourth floor of the D-ground reinforced concrete structure (refinite), Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Seoul (hereinafter “instant house”) was leased by the Defendants, and the said lease deposit was paid to the Defendants by the Defendants, either there is no dispute between the parties or according to the statement under subparagraph 1.

According to the above facts, since the lease contract of this case was terminated upon the expiration of the period, the defendants are obligated to refund the above lease deposit to the plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

(A) The Defendants are jointly obligated to return the lease deposit of a joint lessor, and thus, the Defendants are jointly obligated to return the deposit. 2. Determination as to the Defendants’ defense

A. As to this, the Defendants’ failure to notify the Plaintiff of the rejection of renewal one month prior to the expiration of the instant lease agreement, and thus, the instant lease agreement was renewed in accordance with Article 6 of the Lease Protection Act and extended the term of the lease to two years. Thus, the Defendants cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim premised on the expiration of the term. However, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff notified Defendant B of the rejection of renewal on August 24, 2018, which is one month prior to the expiration of the term of the instant lease agreement, and thus, the Defendants’ aforementioned assertion is without merit.

B. On February 8, 2018, the Defendants filed a lawsuit seeking acquisition of ownership transfer registration against F on the grounds that F did not receive the transfer registration and the Defendants subsequently sold the instant house to Nonparty F on February 8, 2018. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim is that the lessor’s status was succeeded to F.