1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. All plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

3. The plaintiffs' total costs of litigation.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On November 2012, 2012, the Plaintiffs and 22 persons, including the Defendant, established the committee to prepare for the instant lawsuit for the claim for the claim for the registration of ownership transfer of the J apartment in Yeongdeungpo-gu (hereinafter referred to as the “instant apartment”) and deposited KRW 1,00,000 per household owned in the Defendant’s passbook, the representative of which was the Defendant from November 6, 2012 to March 26, 2013, as the activity expenses of the said preparatory committee.

After that, on January 3, 2013, the above 22, delegated the above apartment site ownership transfer registration procedure to K Law Firm K (hereinafter “K”), and K filed a provisional application with the Seoul Southern District Court for the prohibition of real estate disposal with the creditor. The plaintiffs did not comply with the above provisional application, and only 14 persons other than the plaintiffs were the plaintiff on July 25, 2013, after the plaintiffs' withdrawal of the provisional application, filed a lawsuit to demand the performance of the procedure for the registration of the ownership transfer of the above apartment site with the Seoul Southern District Court on July 25, 2013.

Therefore, since the amount that the plaintiffs kept to the defendant as the activity expenses of the preparatory committee of this case was lost for the purpose of custody from the time K refused the plaintiffs' request, the defendant is obligated to pay the above amount of custody and damages for delay to the plaintiffs.

B. From November 6, 2012 to March 26, 2013, the fact that the Plaintiffs deposited KRW 1,000,000 per household owned apartment in the name of the activity expenses of the instant preparatory committee between the Defendant’s passbook and the Defendant’s passbook, does not conflict between the parties.

Furthermore, the above money deposited by the Plaintiffs to the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant activity expenses”) determines the purpose of custody as alleged by the Plaintiffs and the return of the said money if its purpose is lost.