1. Defendant E’s registration of singing practice room business in the annexed Form 3 to Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) C.

The main lawsuit and counterclaim are also examined.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The real estate indicated in the Attachment 1, which entered into the instant lease agreement, was jointly owned by A and Plaintiff C. However, on July 17, 2010, Plaintiff C concluded a lease agreement with Defendant D, setting a deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000, KRW 550,000, KRW 550,000, and the lease term of KRW 3 years with respect to the portion of KRW 76.56 square meters in a ship (hereinafter “instant building”) which connects each point of the attached Map 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1 among the said real estate.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

After the conclusion of the above lease agreement, Defendant D’s registration and business of the instant karaoke machine was transferred to the registered name of the singing practice room business under his/her name F’s name, and the instant building operated the singing practice room business under his/her trade name “G singing practice room” (hereinafter “the instant singing practice room”). After which, around November 29, 201, Defendant D transferred the registered name to Defendant E.

Details of the registration of the karaoke machine business of this case registered in the Agency of Changwon-si is as specified in attached Table 3.

(see Article 18 of the Music Industry Promotion Act). (c)

Plaintiff

On September 2012, 2012, Plaintiff B, who interfered with the business of Defendant D, demanded Defendant D to go to the instant singing practice room, and caused Defendant D’s disturbance to interfere with Defendant D’s singing practice room business by avoiding disturbance, and thereby was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1,50,000 as a result of the crime of interference with business.

(C) On the other hand, Plaintiff B interfered with Defendant D’s singing practice room business on July 17, 2013 in the above case.

Although ‘the suspicion' was prosecuted, the verdict of innocence was pronounced on this part.

The above judgment became final and conclusive around May 29, 2015. D.

Upon the termination of the instant lease agreement, Defendant D paid all the rent by July 17, 2013, which is the term of the instant lease agreement, and thereafter, the entrance of the instant building was set aside.