All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The court shall judge whether the origin of facts is true in accordance with logical and empirical rules free conviction, taking into account the purport of the whole pleadings and the result of examination of evidence;

Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 202 of the evidence selection and evaluation belong to the exclusive authority of the fact-finding court unless it exceeds the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

2. The lower court determined that the deceased F (hereinafter “the deceased”) and the Defendant B received advance payment management expenses separately from the lessee’s lease deposit, and that the advance payment management expenses were the property of the deceased or the property of the Plaintiff and the Defendants, co-inheritors after the deceased’s death, on the following grounds.

The advance payment management expenses are not collected from the deceased and the households sold to the third party by the defendant B, but are received only from the lessees of a sectioned building according to the lease contract, and are not collected pursuant to the related Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the "Aggregate Buildings

The advance payment management expenses are not limited to the management expenses for common areas, the title of which is to be paid to the management body pursuant to the Aggregate Buildings Act, but are operational funds for management of I including the section for exclusive use. It was used by the deceased or the defendant B aggregate building manager, not by the status of the manager of the aggregate building, but by the tenant or the defendant B's personal account.

It is insufficient to reverse the judgment that advance payment management expenses should be attributed to the lessor only by stating the "payment to the management office at the time of occupancy" in the lease contract.

The judgment below

In light of the evidence duly admitted, the judgment of the court below is beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or is subject to the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings.