The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 1, 2018, Defendant D entered into a contract with Defendant B and the Daegu-gu E-gu building owned by it (hereinafter “instant building”) on the lease deposit amounting to KRW 5,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 600,000 from April 20, 2018 to April 19, 2020.

Defendant D operated a mutual skin management room with the name of “F” in the instant building, but the said lease deposit or the fee for the interior of the skin management room was borne by the Plaintiff and G.

B. Around August 2018 without Defendant B’s consent, Defendant D entered into a contract to transfer KRW 38,000,000 (i.e., lease deposit amount of KRW 5,000,000 for premium of KRW 33,000 for premium of KRW 5,000 for premium of KRW 33,00,000 for the instant building).

However, as Defendant B did not consent to sub-lease, Defendant C could not operate the skin management office in the building of this case.

C. Defendant B terminated the above lease on the ground of Defendant D’s unpaid rent and unauthorized transfer of the right of lease, and won the lawsuit against Defendant D and C seeking the delivery of the instant building.

(Seoul District Court 2019Kadan10461) The above judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

[Ground of recognition] Facts or absence of dispute with this court, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant D

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion, G, and Defendant D, the Plaintiff and G, and Defendant D, who have the Plaintiff and G with the right to receive secondary management, provided the business operator’s registration name, the lessee’s name and labor, and operated the secondary management office. This constitutes a partnership.

Defendant D neglected to report on revenue and expenditure, thereby causing damage equivalent to the expenses for the test of the above department management room to the union.

The plaintiff served a duplicate of the complaint against the defendant D by serving the copy of the complaint of this case, and as to G, the plaintiff filed a request for dissolution of each association in the course of examining the witness of this case, and thus, the above union has against the defendant D.