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

A. On April 21, 2006, the Plaintiff used part of the first floor (150.57 square meters; hereinafter “instant commercial building”) under the ground of the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan City building, which was used as an entertainment drinking house from the Defendant, as a entertainment drinking house, as a deposit of KRW 45 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.9 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.9 million, and period of lease from April 25, 2008, and thereafter used it as an entertainment drinking house.

In concluding a lease contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay heavy taxation on land and buildings used as entertainment taverns by the lessee, but the Plaintiff, the lessee, to pay heavy taxation by the due date.

(hereinafter “instant special agreement”). B.

The lease has been renewed thereafter, and the special agreement of this case has been maintained as it is.

The Plaintiff and the Defendant renewed a lease agreement on April 20, 2014, and the lease deposit is KRW 50,440,000,000 for the lease deposit and KRW 2.49,000 for the monthly rent (payment date is the 25,000,000 won per month. Although the contract stipulates that the monthly rent is KRW 2.133,00,000 for the contract, the actual monthly rent is the 2.49,00,000), and the term of the lease is from April 20, 2014 to April 20, 2016, and the instant special agreement

(c) The portion of a building among heavy taxation related to entertainment tavern business shall arrive at the end of July each year for land and at the end of September each year for land;

On October 1, 2015, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff, on the ground that the monthly rent of four months and heavy taxation stipulated in the instant lease agreement were unpaid, a certified mail stating the intent to terminate the instant lease agreement, and reached the Plaintiff around that time.

E. On March 27, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with D to sell the right to the instant commercial building in KRW 100 million and requested D to enter into a lease contract with D to the Defendant for a new lessee arranged by the Plaintiff on April 6, 2016, but the Defendant rejected such contract.

[Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 6, and 9 (A.)