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

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

Plaintiff’s assertion

Since October 20, 1968, E, which was the owner of 122.38 square meters and 130.28 square meters of 122.38 square meters of 2nd and 122.38 square meters of 2nd and 2nd floor of 40.28 square meters of 1968, the Seoul Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City proposed that the Plaintiff shall be entitled to file a deposit money with the Plaintiff to seek a deposit money when selling the above building as the house located on the second floor of the building. Accordingly, the Plaintiff continued to manage the building of this case for 40 years since the date when the director was in the building of this case.

The Plaintiff managed the instant building by August 2015, 47 years from the Plaintiff’s own expense, laid the mosium into a mostove boiler, replaced the rooftop mostove, installed three times the water meter, installed electric facilities, and replaced the worn-out mos.

On December 26, 1974, E sold the instant building to Defendant F’s husband and the father of Defendant C, and completed the registration of ownership transfer to G. The G also proposed to the Plaintiff that “if he well manages the instant building, he would cover the house security deposit to be directors when he sells the instant building,” and accordingly, the Plaintiff continued to reside and manage in the instant building even thereafter.

G died on November 25, 1994, and on May 8, 1995, the Defendants completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the instant 1/2 shares among the instant buildings. The Defendants sold the instant building to H on April 30, 2015, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 30, 2015.

Therefore, according to the agreement of the above G, the Defendants, the general successor of G, are obligated to pay KRW 100 million, which is the amount equivalent to the security deposit, to the Plaintiff in light of

Judgment

In full view of the facts without dispute, Gap 3-1, 3-2, 7, 8, 10, 12, and Eul 1's respective entries and arguments, whether registration of preservation of ownership of Eul's building of this case was completed in relation to the building of this case, and the purport of the whole arguments.