1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The facts of the basis for the lease agreement between J and the Defendants, representing the Plaintiff, concluded a lease agreement with regard to each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet No. 1 owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant building”), as indicated below, as to each of the buildings listed in the following table, as to the so-called “leased object” (hereinafter “each of the instant lease agreements”), and the fact that the Defendants occupied the leased object upon delivery after paying the deposit to J is not disputed between the parties, or that the said leased object is not in dispute between the parties, or that the Defendants occupied the leased object upon delivery, by adding up the whole purport of the pleadings as indicated in the evidence No. 1, 2, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1-6, Eul evidence No. 2-1, evidence No. 3-1, evidence No. 4-1, evidence No. 5-1, and evidence No. 5-1, Eul or evidence No. 6-1.

Around November 14, 2009, KRW 2 C 35 million, the deposit amount of the leased object as of the date of concluding the contract by the Defendant, KRW 1B 1 B, 201, KRW 41,000,000,000; around July 201, 201, KRW 3D 40,000,000; KRW 444,000,000 on July 24, 201, KRW 4D 103D 3D 103,00,00 KRW 5,00 KRW 50,000 on August 104, 201; KRW 30,000 KRW 63,00,000 on February 16, 2016, KRW 300,000 on KRW 10637,371.2,500,000 on July 16, 2011.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that a monthly rent agreement is concluded with J (hereinafter “monthly rent agreement”) for convenience.

(2) The contract of a transfer on a deposit basis (hereinafter referred to as “transfer on a deposit basis”) shall be made only with the power of representation to enter into the contract.

(2) The Defendants’ assertion was lawful representative of the Plaintiff, and thus, the J concluded each of the instant lease agreements with the Defendants constitutes an act of unauthorized representation. (2) The summary of the Defendants’ assertion was the Plaintiff’s assertion.

even if J did not confer the power of representation in respect of the lease contract.

The J also has the basic power to act on behalf of the plaintiff on the management and lease of the building of this case.