1. Of the real estate listed in the attached list to the Plaintiff, Defendant B Co., Ltd. 7, Defendant C Co., Ltd. 8, and Defendant Co., Ltd.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 8, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) under which the entire real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) was determined as the lease term from December 29, 2016 to December 28, 2021, as the initial lease deposit amount of KRW 70 million, monthly rent of KRW 64 million (in 24 months after the commencement of the lease agreement, after the commencement of the lease agreement), and consented to the sublease of the instant building E.

B. Of the instant building, Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”), Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”), Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”), and Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D”), respectively sublet 13 floors. The Defendants, after completing their business registration as the location of each corresponding part, are occupying and using it.

C. E from April 29, 2017 to the same year.

7. Until December 28, 201,200, total monthly rent of KRW 211,200,000 (=64 million per month of rent x 10% of value-added tax for three months x 10% of value-added tax for three months) and management expenses, electricity charges, and water tax for the period from December 29, 2016 to July 28, 2017, were not paid KRW 38,360,810.

On August 1, 2017, the Plaintiff did not pay a three-year or more rent to E, and thus the lease contract of this case is terminated.

'A' sending content-certified mail to the same year.

8.2. The E arrives at E.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on August 2, 2017, where the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to terminate the lease agreement reached E, and the Defendants’ sublease contract was terminated due to the impossibility of the performance of the sub-lease contract upon the Plaintiff’s filing of the claim for return of the object due to the instant lawsuit. As such, the Defendants are not the aggregate building, but the relevant occupied part of each of the instant buildings to the Plaintiff.