1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the Plaintiff ordering delivery and payment is revoked.

The defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Plaintiff A owns 4/9 shares in the instant store, and Plaintiff B owns 5/9 shares in the instant store, and Party E is the mother of the Plaintiffs.

B. On May 23, 2017, E entered into a lease agreement with C on June 15, 2017 with respect to the instant store operated by E as a coffee shop with F, and on June 2, 2017, E paid KRW 20,000,000,000 for lease deposit under the said lease agreement on behalf of C, and around that time, E transferred the instant store to C.

C. C determined that it is difficult to operate the instant store, and returned the key to the instant store to E or F before commencing the business, and introduced the Defendant to F as a new lessee.

As a broker of F, a lease contract of KRW 20,00,000 for the instant store and KRW 2,00,000 for the instant store was entered into between E and the Defendant. The Defendant registered the business of the instant store on June 15, 2017, and the Defendant thereafter occupies the instant store.

E. Since then, as the Defendant did not start the pertinent shop, E resisted it, and returned KRW 20,000,000 to F around July 4, 2017, and requested the Defendant to leave the instant store.

F. However, while continuously occupying the instant store, the Defendant did not pay to E any one time, which was in excess of the above lease agreement, and E notified the termination of the lease agreement with the Defendant on July 23, 2019 where the instant lawsuit is pending. This reached the Defendant on July 24, 2019.

G. Meanwhile, around July 4, 2019, E transferred to the Plaintiff the claim for return of the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent under the lease agreement with the Defendant at the rate of 4/9 and 5/9, and upon delegation from E, the Plaintiffs were delegated.