1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. The grounds for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the amended party members are as follows, except for the following cases: (a) the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

The plaintiffs, as the cause of the principal claim of this case, between F and F, which was the owner of the building of this case, on January 15, 2015, set the lease term of the building of this case three years, and the lease deposit amount of KRW 95,00,00.

A. The Defendant, on September 4, 2015, succeeded to the status of the lessor of the instant lease agreement pursuant to the Housing Lease Protection Act by acquiring the instant building from F, and accordingly, succeeded to the status of the lessor pursuant to the Housing Lease Protection Act. Since the instant lease agreement was terminated due to the Plaintiffs’ declaration of termination of the instant lease agreement or due to the expiration of the lease term, the Defendant asserts that the Defendant is liable to return the instant lease deposit to the Plaintiffs.

With respect to the claim of this case, the defendant asserts that the lease contract of this case constitutes a false declaration of conspiracy under Article 108 of the Civil Act and that it is null and void. In addition, since the plaintiffs possess without any title to occupy the building of this case as the cause of the counterclaim of this case, the plaintiffs jointly assert that the building of this case should be delivered to the defendant.

According to the evidence No. 1 of this case as to the main lawsuit of this case, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiffs and F entered into the lease contract of this case with the lease term of three years and the lease deposit of 95,00,000 won as to the building of this case on January 15, 2015. However, the evidence No. 3, No. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 13, 14, evidence No. 15-1, 2, 3, and 16-1, 16-1, 2, 3, and 16-2, evidence No. 16-1, 7, and evidence No. 8 of this case, and witness No. 1-F testimony of the court of first instance.