1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C, D, E, and F pay KRW 38,181,818, respectively, to the Plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;

2. Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts;

3. Some of the dismissals filed a claim for the payment of damages for delay that occurred after July 17, 2019. However, the Defendants’ obligation to return the lease deposit appears to have a simultaneous performance relationship with the Plaintiff’s obligation to return the leased object. However, even if one of the parties’ obligation is in a simultaneous performance relationship, even if one of the parties’ obligation becomes due in a bilateral contract, the obligor is not liable for the delay of performance even if the other party’s obligation is not performed until the other party’s obligation is performed. Such effect does not necessarily result in the claimant’s exercise of the right of defense for simultaneous performance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da54604, 54611, Mar. 13, 1998). The part seeking the payment of the above damages for delay