(a) India 232.36 m of the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

(b) 67,146,356 Won and its corresponding;

A. On November 13, 2013, the Plaintiff leased two floors (hereinafter “instant real estate”) among the real estate listed in the attached Table list to the Defendant by setting the deposit amounting to KRW 40 million, KRW 5.6 million per month, KRW 5.6 million per month (excluding value-added tax), management expenses (excluding value-added tax), and period of lease from November 23, 2013 to November 22, 2015.

B. At the time of the above contract, the Defendant agreed to pay the overdue charge calculated at the rate of 25% per annum in the event that the rent, management fee, and public charge are overdue.

C. On November 23, 2013, the Defendant occupied and used the instant real estate by taking over it from the Plaintiff.

As the Plaintiff delayed rent, etc. from January 11, 2014, on April 22, 2014, the Plaintiff sent a content-certified mail demanding the Defendant to pay the rent, etc. in arrears until April 28, 2014. The said mail was served to the Defendant around that time.

E. The Defendant’s overdue rent, management fee, public charge, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 25% per annum for the overdue rent, management fee, and public charge calculated as of November 30, 2014 are as indicated in the details of the claim for the rent in attached Form.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-3 evidence, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff asserted that the above lease contract was terminated due to the arrival of the above content-certified mail to the Defendant. However, the above mail merely demands payment of overdue rent, etc. and it is insufficient to recognize that the above lease contract was terminated at the temporary border of the Plaintiff’s assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

However, it is clear in the record that the copy of the complaint of this case, stating the declaration of intention to deliver the real estate of this case, was delivered on July 17, 2014 on the ground that the above lease contract was terminated due to the delay in rent for more than two months by the defendant, and the above lease contract was terminated on the arrival date of the above lease contract.

Therefore, the defendant.