2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On November 2006, the Plaintiff leased the 7th floor room of the D building in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant shop”) owned by the Defendant at KRW 200 million as lease deposit and KRW 7 million as monthly rent. From December 1, 2014, the lease deposit was reduced to KRW 130 million as lease deposit and KRW 6 million as monthly rent.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The Defendant leased the instant store from the Plaintiff and operated a health room in this place.

C. On October 15, 2015, the Defendant did not want to renew the instant lease agreement to the Plaintiff, and sent a written notification containing the purport that the instant lease agreement expires on November 16, 2015, both the instant store return and the lease deposit return are simultaneously performed.

On October 23, 2015, the plaintiff also agreed and sent a content-certified mail to the effect that the store of this case is restored to its original state within prompt time along with a settlement statement after deducting the unpaid rent, etc. to the defendant.

E. From October 30, 2015 to November 7, 2011 of the same year, the Defendant performed the removal work of interior interior interior interior interior interior interior of the instant store, and transferred the instant store to the Plaintiff on November 25, 2015, and received KRW 9,193,630 from the Plaintiff the remainder of lease deposit after deducting the overdue rent, etc. that had been in arrears from the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, Eul evidence 1, witness E's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant did not perform its duty of restoration by intentionally destroying the instant store’s ceiling, wall, singler, electric cable, water pipe, etc. In the process of returning the instant store. As such, the Defendant is expected to incur approximately KRW 60,900,000 for the Defendant to restore the damaged part to its original state, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the said money.