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

1. The reasoning for this court’s explanation is as follows: (a) using the “this court” of 5th and 3th of the judgment of the first instance as “the first instance court”; and (b) using not more than 8th and not more than 3th of the 8th and the Defendant Association’s assertion as follows; and (c) citing the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance court, it is identical to the entry in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for adding the following judgments to the judgment

[C] According to the above evidence and the above facts, the plaintiffs have 21 defense rooms in the multi-family house in this case and most prior lessees have occupied, and each subparagraph's lease deposit is deemed to have been expected to have been similar to the lease deposit that the plaintiffs paid to F. Nevertheless, the plaintiffs are not likely to have actively requested the defendant C or F to provide specific evidentiary materials against the defendant C or F, or to have concluded each lease contract in this case after examining the market price or the amount of priority lease deposit in this case's multi-family house in detail. Thus, it is reasonable to view that such negligence of the plaintiffs has a major cause for the occurrence and expansion of damages suffered by the plaintiffs. Thus, the defendants' liability is limited to 40% by considering all these circumstances.

Therefore, the Defendants are deemed to have a quasi-joint and several liability relationship inasmuch as each of the Defendants [the Defendant’s obligation to the Plaintiffs was independent of one another’s obligation arising from separate causes, but the obligation to one of the parties with the same economic purpose terminates when one of the other’s obligation is extinguished due to repayment, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da47677, Mar. 26, 2009)] and each of the above amounts are 24,000,000 won against the Plaintiffs (i.e., each lease deposit KRW 60,000,000) and each of the above amounts.