1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants exceeding the money ordered to be paid under the following subparagraphs shall be revoked.

1. The reasons why this court should explain this part of the basic facts are as follows: “In the U.S.,” “In the U.S., the U.S.,” from No. 3 to No. 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance,” and “In the U.S., the U., U.S.,F.,” respectively, “In the U.S., Sep. 27, 2012” from No. 17 of the same part, “In September 28, 2012,” respectively, and the following is added following No. 18 of the same part, and the following is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of No. 1, E., to the part in the 3rd part of the judgment of the court of first instance

【Additional Matters】

F. The provisions governing the deduction of the Defendant Association in relation to the instant case are as follows:

Article 19 (Claim and Payment of Mutual Aid Money) (1) In case where a mutual aid member is liable to compensate the client for damage pursuant to the provisions of Article 30 of the Act (referring to the Act on Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions), the person who suffers property damage shall be paid pursuant to paragraph (2).

(2) Where a person who has suffered property damage due to a brokerage accident pursuant to paragraph (1) (hereinafter referred to as "person subject to mutual aid") requests the Association to pay mutual aid money after meeting documents proving the amount of damage, the Association shall review the authenticity of the documents requested, and shall pay the amount equivalent to the ratio of negligence of the members to the amount of mutual aid within the limit of the amount of mutual aid

(9) Upon receipt of the notice, the beneficiary shall pay the mutual aid money within 60 days from the receipt of the notice.

Provided, That the foregoing shall not apply where any inevitable reason, such as failure to submit documents under paragraph (7), exists.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. In full view of the evidence adopted earlier and the statements stated in Gap evidence Nos. 9 and 10, Eul who arranged the contract of this case as the lease deposit from the plaintiff in violation of the terms of the contract of this case.