1. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) out of the KRW 4,200,00 deposited by the Seoul Southern District Court No. 7582 on December 21, 2017 as Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2017.

1. The facts of recognition are as shown in the annexed sheet of claim;

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and 17, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff (Appointed) asserts that since the deceased paid the lease deposit as the sole lessee of the building of this case, the right to claim the payment of deposit money belongs to the plaintiff (Appointed Party), the appointed party E and F (hereinafter the plaintiffs).

The defendant 1) The defendant's father and G paid the lease deposit to the defendant, and the defendant has the right to claim the payment of deposit money. 2) The defendant is the defendant as a joint tenant in a de facto marital relationship with the deceased, and therefore 50% of the right to claim the payment of deposit money is in a de facto marital relationship between the deceased and the defendant from October 201 to October 2016, and even if not, the deceased and the defendant were in a de facto marital relationship with the deceased, so Article 9 (2) of the Housing Lease Protection Act states that in a case where the heir does not live in a family community at the time of the death of the tenant, if the heir does not live in a family community life at the time of the death of the tenant, the person in a de facto marital relationship with the person who was in a marital relationship with the deceased

3. Determination

A. In full view of the following: (a) the source of the deposit for lease deposit, the lessee Gap evidence No. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings, it can be acknowledged that the deceased paid the deposit for lease; (b) the sole lessee of the building of this case; and (c) the Defendant’s evidence No. 3 written by the joint lessee No. 1 does not have any evidence to prove the authenticity thereof; and (d) the statement No. 1 does not interfere with the recognition

B. The records and images of Gap evidence Nos. 17 and Eul evidence Nos. 6 through 8 as to whether the defendant jointly succeeded to the lessee’s rights and duties are in a de facto marital relationship with the deceased in the building of this case at the time of the death of the deceased.