1.(a)

Defendant A Global Co., Ltd. (1) The real estate listed in the separate sheet to Plaintiff A, 2) shall be the Plaintiff B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 is owned by the Plaintiff A, the 2 real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2, and the 3 real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 3, and the 4 real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 is owned by

B. On April 17, 2017, the Defendants concluded a lease agreement with the management company Homaman Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) on a three-month basis between April 20, 2017 and July 19, 2017 with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) and the management company entrusted with the management authority by the Plaintiffs, and Defendant E occupy the real estate listed in the separate sheet, respectively.

C. Although the above lease agreement between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants terminated on July 19, 2017, the Defendants did not return the real estate in their possession to the Plaintiffs.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendants are obligated to return the real estate in their possession to the plaintiffs who are the owners.

B. On April 6 through 7, 2017, the non-party company asserted that the Defendants infringed on the instant real estate without permission and stolen the Defendants’ property owned. Accordingly, the Defendants may not return each real estate in so far as the Plaintiffs do not settle the damage claim that the Defendants owned against the non-party company. 2) Even if the damage claim against the non-party company is acknowledged as alleged by the Defendants, it is not in the simultaneous performance relationship with the Defendant’s obligation to return the leased property. Thus, this part of the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are justified.