2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is KRW 1,418,950 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

The plaintiff is a company that operates the "Seoul Hot Spring" in Nowon-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, 251-7, and the defendant is a company that operates and manages the off-road parking lot for the Handong-dong Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, 251-9 (hereinafter "the instant parking lot").

On April 2012, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant to allow customers using the Seoul Hot Spring to use the instant parking lot free of charge, as follows:

(hereinafter referred to as “instant agreement”). Article 3 (Period of Agreement)

1. The period of a parking lot use agreement shall be from May 1, 2012 to April 30, 2013;

Article 4 (Scope of Use of Agreement) The defendant shall have the right to operate the parking lot of this case, and the scope of the business used by the plaintiff shall be as follows:

2. Arrangement of vehicles in parking lots and prevention of accidents;

5. Performance of the control over on-site workers by the defendant;

1. The monthly user fee shall be KRW 8,000,000, and the payment date shall be made in advance to the bank account designated by the defendant at least five days before the month in which the payment is to be made;

Article 7 (Cooperation with Vehicles Using Parking Lots)

1. A vehicle that does not use the plaintiff's facilities shall actively cooperate so as not to cause inconvenience to other vehicles;

【In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including the land number), and the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant claiming the plaintiff in this lawsuit shall allow the plaintiff's customers to freely use the 115 parking lot of this case, regardless of the number of parking spaces or the location of the parking surface.

Nevertheless, the Defendant forced the instant parking lot to park on the surface of 18 pages located at the right edge of the wall of the instant parking lot (hereinafter “18 pages of the instant parking lot”), and prevented the parking on the remaining 97 pages.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by default or tort due to the violation of the agreement of this case.

2.2