1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant B’s KRW 50,000,000 and as to this,

B. Defendant C, D, and E are jointly with Defendant B, and they are 50.

1. The following facts are: (a) there is no dispute between the Plaintiff, Defendant B, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L; or (b) the overall purport of the pleadings is considered to have been reflected in the evidence Nos. 1-3; and (c) the Plaintiff and the remaining Defendants are deemed to have led to confession pursuant to Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act.

A. M on August 6, 1987, completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to N of the Geum-gu Busan (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. M died on July 15, 1993, and his/her heir as his/her child and Defendant G, H, I, J, K, and L.

C. The O died on April 15, 2012, and his heir is Defendant C, D, E, and F, the wife of Defendant B and his child.

On June 17, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant B to set the second floor of the instant building (hereinafter “instant building”) as deposit money for lease on a deposit basis with the end of June 17, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”). Around that time, the Plaintiff paid Defendant B KRW 40,000,000 for the deposit money for lease on a deposit basis. After receiving delivery of the instant building portion, the Plaintiff agreed to increase the deposit money for lease with Defendant B as KRW 50,00,000 on October 30, 2014, and paid the Defendant B KRW 10,000,000 additionally.

b. Claim against Defendant B, C, D, and E

A. The Plaintiff, as his heir, consented to the conclusion of the instant lease agreement and the increase of the key money for lease on a deposit basis, as well as the remaining Defendants except Defendant B, and thereafter, asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff agreed to terminate the instant lease agreement with Defendant B. It is deemed that Defendant B, C, D, and E were led to confession under Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Thus, since the lease contract of this case was terminated by the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant B, the defendant B, as the lessor, is jointly with the defendant C, D, and E, and is out of the above lease deposit in proportion to their respective shares.