A. On November 26, 2010, the Defendant acquired the ownership of a house listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant house”) and the instant house is published as one house on the registry, but in fact, it has been modified to the structure of two independent houses without permission, and the number of each entrance is indicated as “401” and “402.”

B. On June 1, 2011, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement between C and C on the part on which the entrance and exit door of the instant house was indicated as 402 (hereinafter “instant 402”) with the said C, and received KRW 80,000,000 from said C as the lease deposit.

C. On March 2, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant with the terms that the Plaintiff leases the instant house with a deposit of KRW 210,00,000, and the period from May 4, 2013 to May 4, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

However, according to the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,00,000 on the day of the contract, and KRW 18,000,000 on March 4, 2013, respectively, in relation to the payment of the down payment of KRW 20,000,000 among the lease deposit, and agreed to use KRW 170,000,000 out of the remainder for the purpose of repaying the secured debt of the right to collateral security established on the instant housing, and the Defendant agreed to change the remainder payment date to April 13, 2013.

The Plaintiff, without knowing the fact that the instant housing was modified without permission as classified by the instant 401 and the instant 402 at the time of the instant lease agreement, knew that the instant 401 was the same as the instant housing indicated in the registry, and that the instant 402 had a separate certified copy of the registry regarding the instant 402, and the Defendant also knew that the instant 401 existed.