1. The Defendants’ respective Plaintiff KRW 70,000,000 per annum until February 14, 2018, and the following day.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 3, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendants on the condition that the store located in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D large 222 square meters (hereinafter “instant store”) owned by the Defendants will be leased with a lease deposit of KRW 150 million, KRW 6.5 million monthly rent, and KRW 6.5 million from April 1, 2015 to April 1, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and paid a lease deposit to the Defendants on the same day.

B. On November 30, 2016, the Plaintiff agreed to terminate the instant lease agreement with the Defendants, and delivered the instant store to the Defendants, and introduced E to the Defendants as a new lessee of the instant store.

C. On December 5, 2016, E entered into a lease agreement with the Defendants on a deposit of KRW 70 million with respect to the instant store in the name of F, his/her father, and KRW 8 million per month of rent. However, E did not pay the Defendants the deposit.

On December 12, 2016, the Defendants returned KRW 80 million out of the deposit KRW 150 million to the Plaintiff under the instant lease agreement.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 to 5, witness E's testimony, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the above facts, the instant lease agreement terminated on November 30, 2016, and barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are obligated to pay to each Plaintiff delay damages from December 1, 2016, which is the date following the termination date of the lease agreement.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff claimed for the payment of damages for delay from November 30, 2016 on the above lease deposit, but the obligation to refund the lease deposit shall be held liable for delay from the date following the termination date of the lease contract. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay against November 30, 2016 on which the lease contract of this case was terminated is without merit.

B. The Defendants’ assertion as to the Defendants are dissatisfied with the Plaintiff, the Defendants, and the F (E).