A. On September 14, 2012, the Defendant: (a) was working as the manager of the management office of the shopping mall operated by the Sungnam-si branch of the shopping mall (hereinafter “instant shopping mall”); (b) pursuant to the order of the head of the said shopping mall; (c) from February 8, 2011 to November 3, 201, the above shopping mall No. 306; and (d) from February 14, 201 to November 7, 2011, the Defendant appealed the above shopping mall No. 114-2 (hereinafter “instant shopping mall No. 114-2”); (c) from July 5, 2011 to November 3, 2011, the Defendant appealed the above judgment of 114-13, 126, 300, 201, 201, 31, 201, 201, 31, 11, 2011, 213, 1211, 1.

B. On June 6, 2010, the Plaintiff leased the instant commercial building 114-2 KRW 50 million, monthly rent of KRW 19.8 million, from July 15, 2010 to July 14, 2012, the term of lease was determined and leased as a carpeta (general restaurant). On February 7, 2011, the instant commercial building 306 KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 180,000, and the term of lease was determined and leased as of February 2, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 2-6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim was seeking to use the instant commercial No. 114-2 as a camera and sell coffees and beverages, etc., and sought to use the said No. 306 as the headquarters and ancillary facilities of the said company’s franchising franchise business. However, the Plaintiff suffered damages due to the Defendant’s business interference, the use of the said No. 114-2 and 306, and the profits therefrom.

Specifically, the plaintiff uses 114-2 of the commercial building of this case.