1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The plaintiff's total costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.

The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance court's decision, in addition to the addition of the following, this case is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The three pages of the decision of the first instance court is the "Defendant F" of the three pages of the decision.

On the three pages of the judgment of the first instance court, the part above 3 to 4 pages above shall be raised as follows.

(1) On June 2, 201, based on the part against G and H in the final decision, the Defendants received a seizure and collection order (Seoul Central District Court 201TT 201TT 23158) against the claims for deposit collection against the Republic of Korea on June 2, 201, and on August 11, 2011, H received a seizure and collection order (Seoul Southern District Court 201TTT 201TT 21589) as to the claims for deposit collection against the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”).

“The contents of the deposit made by the depositor are determined formally by the entry of the deposit, so if several depositors do not divide the amount of deposit and jointly enter the same amount of deposit, the depositor shall be deemed to have deposited at an equal rate. Even if the internal share of deposit is substantially different, this is a matter to be resolved separately within the depositor.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da79562, Mar. 29, 2012). This legal doctrine likewise applies to the attribution and ratio of the right to claim the deposit according to the cancellation of security in a case where a joint deposit is made for the security of the suspension of compulsory execution.

Therefore, even if there is a person who actually contributed to the full amount of the security deposit among the joint depositors, it is merely a reason to claim only within the internal relationship between the joint depositors, and a third party is another joint depositor.