1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On February 2011, the Plaintiff Incorporated Real Estate Trust Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Incorporated Real Estate Trust”) and the Moccccck C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Mocck C”) concluded a land trust agreement with respect to the new construction and sale of the main complex building on the land outside Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and 1 parcel, which was executed by the Mock Co., Ltd., and the Mock Co., Ltd., to sell and dispose of the said land and new building on the land.

B. Since then, Plaintiff AS Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff AS Construction”) newly built an aggregate building on the said land as a contractor. On February 14, 2011, the registration of ownership preservation was completed in the name of Plaintiff AS real estate trust, which was based on trust with respect to the first floor No. 124 and 34.61m2 of the said aggregate building (hereinafter “instant store”).

C. At around March 12, 2013, Moccccco and D entered into a lease agreement on the instant store with the lessor as Mocco Co., Ltd., and the lessee as D (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). A lease deposit is KRW 30 million, the lease term is from April 1, 2013 to March 31, 2017, and the rent is KRW 380,000,000 (excluding value-added tax) in relation to the rent, and KRW 380,000,000 (excluding value-added tax) in relation to the rent, KRW 24 months within the contract term, and KRW 25 months from the 25-month amount, and KRW D shall pay the full amount of the rent for the said free use period as penalty if the lease is terminated due to any cause attributable to D. D, which is deposit into the account in the name of the Plaintiff Bio real estate trust in the name of the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff

On March 28, 2013, with the consent to the instant lease agreement, the first real estate trust was confirmed to D in relation to the said contract, and the first instance court confirmed that the first instance court merely consented to the lease agreement as a trustee to the instant store, etc., and that the lessor was a vector deposit.