1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. On March 23, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”) with the terms that the Plaintiff shall set the deposit amount of KRW 50,000,00, and the term of lease from April 12, 2013 to April 12, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”) to lease the instant house of KRW 50,000 for the deposit amount of KRW 50,000 for the instant house and KRW 50,000 for the instant house registered as the owner of the F acting as the broker of Defendant C and D and the owner of the E.

At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, Defendant B operated the real estate brokerage office under the trade name of “J real estate” in Scheon City I, and Defendant C and D worked as a brokerage assistant at the said brokerage office as a married couple.

At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, on July 7, 2011, the establishment registration of the instant housing was completed near the maximum amount of debt (the instant housing is part of the joint security) to the creditor, and KRW 980,000,000 as the creditor.

On June 2015, Macheon Agricultural Cooperatives applied for the auction of real estate for the housing of this case to K with the Government District Court of Dongcheon District on June 2015, and the decision to commence auction was made on June 25, 2015, and the record of the above decision was completed on the same day.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant house is registered in the Real Estate Registration Book as the owner of E, but its actual owner is LA’s property under title trust with the said E.

The issue of title trust of the instant housing is an important matter that affects the possibility of recovering the lease deposit, but Defendant C and D did not inform the Plaintiff of the fact of title trust while mediating the instant lease agreement.

If the Plaintiff was notified from the Defendants of the fact that the instant housing was nominal, it would not have concluded the instant lease agreement.

In this case.