A. On January 3, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) leased various facilities from the Defendant in Jeju-si Land Building C (hereinafter “instant building”); and (b) operated a mobile communications agency’s business with the trade name, “D”; (c) on January 3, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant extended the lease contract by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 25 million, the annual rent of KRW 25 million, and the lease term as December 31, 2015.

B. On November 2015, the Plaintiff made an oral promise to receive premium of KRW 20 million from the instant store between E and E seeking to operate a mobile communications agency business at the instant store, and concluded a lease agreement between the Defendant and E., and the Defendant refused to conclude a lease agreement with E at the time.

C. On December 15, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the transfer and acquisition of the right (facilities) to transfer the instant store’s right to KRW 29 million to F (hereinafter “instant premium contract”). On December 21, 2015, the Plaintiff received KRW 3 million as the down payment of the instant premium contract from F, and the Defendant refused to enter into a lease contract with F arranged by the Plaintiff.

After the Plaintiff delivered the instant store, on January 4, 2016, the Defendant entered into a new lease contract with E, a direct deposit of KRW 20 million, annual rent of KRW 26.4 million (including value-added tax), and E currently engages in mobile communications agency business at the instant store.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff refused to conclude each lease agreement with E and F arranged by the Plaintiff without justifiable grounds, and subsequently, concluded a lease agreement with E and directly, excluding the Plaintiff.

The defendant is without good cause.