1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 50,000,000 won and the period from April 18, 2010 to May 22, 2020.

In full view of the purport of each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the court rendered a judgment that "the plaintiff who leased the D building Nos. 50,000,000 won from the defendants was not paid the lease deposit of 50,000 won from the defendants after the lease contract was terminated, and the above court rendered a judgment on June 9, 2010 that "the defendant shall jointly and severally pay to the plaintiff 50,000,000 won and 20% interest per annum from April 18, 2010 to the day of full payment" and the above judgment can be acknowledged as the facts established on June 26, 2010.

According to the above, the Defendants are obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 50,00,000 and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from April 18, 2010 to May 22, 2020, which is the last delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, and 12% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

As to this, Defendant B merely lent his name to Defendant C in relation to the above lease agreement and argued to the effect that there was no contractual relationship between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is groundless. However, in the lawsuit of this case brought by the Plaintiff for the extension of the prescription period of the lease deposit claim established by the existing final judgment, Defendant B did not conclude a lease agreement with the Plaintiff, and disputing the existence of the lease deposit claim goes against the res judicata effect of the existing final judgment, and thus, Defendant B’s claim cannot be accepted.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.