1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 14, 1998, the Plaintiff and E (former name: D) made the registration of the establishment of the instant chonsegwon to E on the ground of the lease agreement concluded between the Plaintiff and E (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the size of 43 square meters (hereinafter “instant store”) of the first floor of the retail store on the first floor among the real estate listed in the attached list as indicated in the attached list by setting the deposit money of KRW 25 million and the duration from July 23, 1997 to July 22, 1999 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. E died on January 8, 2015, and the Defendants were the children of the network E, and the Defendants’ share of inheritance is 1/2, respectively.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. (1) The plaintiff alleged by the parties (1) although the plaintiff had made the registration of the establishment of the right to lease on a deposit basis to the deceased E, the plaintiff requested the deceased E to return the right to lease on a deposit basis as a director to move his office to another place at the end of December 1998, and deliver the store of this case, and the plaintiff returned 25 million won to the deceased E on December 31, 1998. Thus, the registration of the establishment of the right to lease on a deposit basis of the right to lease on a deposit basis of this case must be cancelled. Even if the plaintiff's return of the right to lease on a deposit basis is not recognized, the right to lease on a deposit basis of the deceased E has expired ten years after the expiration of ten years after the end of the term of the right to lease on a deposit basis.

(2) The Defendant’s assertion did not cancel the registration of the establishment of the instant chonsegwon and there is no evidence that the Plaintiff returned the key money. Since the instant chonsegwon is deemed to have been implicitly renewed until now, it can respond to the Defendant’s claim for cancellation of the lease deposit amounting to KRW 25 million.

B. (1) Therefore, as alleged by the Plaintiff, we comprehensively consider the following: (a) whether the instant lease contract was terminated by agreement between the parties and the Plaintiff returned the key money for lease on a deposit basis; (b) the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2; (c) the fact-finding results and the purport of the entire pleadings of the instant court.