1. Defendant B pays to the Plaintiff KRW 70,000,000.

2. Defendant C jointly with Defendant B and jointly with the Plaintiff 70,000.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 6, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B and D (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) under the brokerage of Defendant C, a licensed real estate agent, with a deposit amount of KRW 70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 for E located in Guro-gu Seoul, Guro-gu and the second floor F of detached Housing (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by Defendant D (hereinafter “D”). The lease agreement was concluded between August 10, 2017 and August 10, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. On July 7, 2017, the Plaintiff paid the down payment of KRW 5 million to Defendant B, and paid the remainder to the said Defendant KRW 5 million on August 1, 2017, and KRW 65 million on August 4, 2017, and received the instant real estate on August 10, 2017.

C. After the delivery of the above real estate, the Plaintiff continuously demanded Defendant B to give consent to the lease agreement, and the Defendant B issued to the Plaintiff a new lease agreement with the term of lease agreement of the instant lease agreement from August 10, 2017 to June 28, 2018, which is ten months from June 28, 2018, to the Plaintiff. The terms and conditions of the special agreement state that “the Plaintiff (Plaintiff) shall return the deposit for lease on a daily basis, and then, “the leaser shall return the deposit for lease until June 28, 2018.”

After the lapse of June 28, 2018, Defendant B did not return to the Plaintiff the deposit amount of KRW 70 million yet.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition as to the claim against the plaintiff B, the above defendant is obligated to return the deposit amount of KRW 70,000,000 to the plaintiff in accordance with the terms and conditions of the above special agreement.

(A) The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize tort liability against the above Defendant. The Plaintiff is selectively responsible for the tort, and the above liability is recognized). Accordingly, the above Defendant’s new lease contract is concluded around March 30, 2018 by intimidation of Defendant C.