1. Defendant C’s KRW 88,269,956, and KRW 84,540,423 and each of the said money to Plaintiff A from April 16, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. (1) The Defendant C concluded a lease agreement, etc.) Nos. 604, 702, and 706 (hereinafter “instant 604, 702, and 706”) of the officetel of reinforced concrete structure on the ground, other than Geumcheon-gu Seoul, Geumcheon-gu et al.

Defendant D is the owner, and Defendant D is a licensed real estate agent who opened and operates the “G Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government under his own name. (2) However, among the above officetels, the registration number 702 was indicated as 706, 706, and 702.

3) On May 14, 2013, Plaintiff B entered into a lease agreement with Defendant C by setting the lease agreement between June 1, 2013 and May 30, 2015 with respect to Defendant C as a broker, and Defendant C paid KRW 4.5 million on May 14, 2013, and KRW 85 million on June 1, 2013, and KRW 702 (No. 706), without verifying the indication on the registry of the instant case 706, which is the object of brokerage, and Defendant D’s employee stated that the lease agreement was 706,000,000,000,000,000 won and KRW 706,000,000,000,000,000 and KRW 706,000,000,000,000,000).

5) On July 3, 2013, with Defendant D’s brokerage, Plaintiff C entered into a lease agreement with Defendant C by setting the lease agreement between July 15, 2013 and July 14, 2015 with respect to the instant 706, and Defendant C paid KRW 90 million on July 3, 2013, and KRW 85 million on July 15, 2013, and KRW 702 (No. 706) of the instant case without properly verifying the indication on the registry of the instant 706, and without explaining that the instant 706 lease agreement was prepared as indicated in the 6th sentence of the instant 706.