1. For the plaintiffs:

A. Defendant Lonebucks and coffee Korea Co., Ltd. are listed in the annexed Table 1.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 18, 201, E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) concluded a real estate security trust agreement with the first beneficiary as to the building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by it with the Asian Trust Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A trust”), Samsung Mutual Savings Bank, and the second beneficiary as the second beneficiary, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Asian Trust on the same day.

B. Order No. 1 of February 17, 2011 by each E to the Defendant Company: (a) Costbucks and coffee Korea (hereinafter “Defendant Company”)

(a) (i) The respective parts of each building described in paragraph (1) shall be KRW 500 million per lease deposit, KRW 15 million per month, and the lease term of KRW 50 million, and Defendant C shall be the five-year lease term; and Defendant C shall be the Disposition No. 1 of April 6, 201

B. (i) The part of the building described in paragraph (1) is KRW 100,000,000 per lease deposit, KRW 5,000 per month, and the lease term until April 5, 2013, and Defendant D’s order 1 on January 26, 2011

C. (i) Since the lease of the premises of the building described in paragraph (1) with the lease deposit amount of KRW 500 million and the lease term until January 25, 2013, the said respective premises of the building have been occupied and used until now.

C. The Plaintiffs purchased the above building on November 21, 201 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 13, 201 of the same year with Plaintiff A’s 65/100 shares, and Plaintiff B’s 35/100 shares.

Text 1-

C. (1) The amount equivalent to the rent for the portion of the building described in paragraph (1) shall be KRW 9.5 million per month.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's entries and the whole purport of pleadings (including each number)

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants gain profits from the amount equivalent to the rent for each of the above parts of the building without any legal grounds by occupying and using the building owned by the plaintiffs without permission, and suffered losses equivalent to the same amount from the plaintiffs.

Therefore, the defendants are individually against the plaintiffs.