1. Each claim of the plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff (appointed party) and the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. C newly constructed the Pyeongtaek-si D Building (hereinafter “instant hotel”) and sold it to the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”).

(2) The sales contract of this case (hereinafter referred to as "each sales contract of this case").

The Plaintiffs concluded a contract for entrusted operation (hereinafter “previous entrusted operation contract”) with respect to each guest room of the instant hotel sold in lots with E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) on the date of the conclusion of each contract for the sales of the instant hotel, and had E operate and manage each guest room of the instant hotel.

C. Around March 2017, the Plaintiffs were notified from F, the Defendant’s in-house director, that E could not operate and manage the instant hotel as of January 2017. On behalf of E, the Defendant was selected as an entrusted business entity of the instant hotel, and that the Defendant would pay the fee rate per minute reduced from March 10, 2017 to 4% per annum due to difficulties in reducing the number of guests and operating the hotel.

After that, around August 2017, the defendant sent a new consignment operation contract in which the part of the consignment commission fee was changed from 7% per annum to 2-8% per annum in comparison with the former consignment contract made between the plaintiffs and the existing E to the plaintiffs and demanded them to enter into a new consignment operation contract between the defendant and the defendant.

E. The designated parties listed in paragraphs 1-21 and 23 of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the list of the designated parties (hereinafter “the Plaintiffs”) concluded an entrusted operation contract with respect to each guest room of the instant hotel sold in lots as above (hereinafter “each entrusted operation contract of this case”) and had the Defendant operate and manage each guest room of the instant hotel, but the designated parties listed in paragraphs 24-32 of the list of the designated parties (hereinafter “the designated parties”) were new with the Defendant.