1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is based on the following facts: (a) the court's "this court" under the 4th 8th th th e of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed to be the "Mayang Branch of the District Court"; and (b) the 10th 12 parts are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence

I. C filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the payment of unpaid rent and management expenses in relation to the postnatal care center of this case, which was rendered a judgment citing the claim of C on January 15, 2015, and the Plaintiff appealed but dismissed.

(Seoul High Court 2015Na7529). 2. Part on the principal claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff paid the monthly rent of KRW 6,442,040 (value-added tax) to C pursuant to the instant lease agreement with C. The Defendant, upon entering into the instant transfer and acquisition agreement with the Plaintiff, independently operated the instant postnatal care center from October 1, 2012 to had the Defendant responsible for all of the instant postnatal care center from that time, and had the management authority, did not pay C the monthly rent from March 1, 2013 to April 1, 2013 and the monthly rent from April 26, 2013 to May 26, 2013 to May 26, 2013 (i.e., the instant rent of KRW 6,442,00 (value-added tax) to C, and thus, the Defendant was obligated to pay the Plaintiff the aggregate of KRW 30,546,246,464,265,264,264,2765).