Text
1. The Defendants jointly paid KRW 50,000,00 to the Plaintiff, but Defendant C, D, G, and H inherited from the net K.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 (a lease contract. Defendant B asserted that the stamp image of Defendant B, which was affixed on the lease contract, was forged with the seal affixed without the consent of K. However, there is no dispute between the parties, and there is no evidence to prove that the fact that the above stamp image is the Defendant B's stamp image is presumed to have established the authenticity of the lease contract, and that K has forged it, the above assertion is without merit). In full view of the entries and the purport of the whole arguments in the evidence Nos. 2 and the whole arguments, each of the facts stated in the "the cause of the changed claim" in the separate sheet [On the other hand, F, who is the child of the deceased K, F, and J, who is the child of Defendant C, D, and J, the child of Defendant C, and H, a qualified acceptance (a Daejeon Family Court's 2020-dan508)] can be recognized.
Therefore, following the termination of the lease agreement, the lessor’s Defendant B is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 50,000,000 as the lease deposit, and Defendant C, D, G, and H, the heir of the network K, are obligated to pay KRW 50,00,000 as the lease deposit within the scope of the property inherited from the network K in collaboration with Defendant B.
2. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.