1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff and defendant's argument

A. The plaintiff's assertion is asserted as follows, and the defendant is entitled to pay the agreed amount of KRW 22,000,000 as well as damages for delay.

1) The Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office of G Building (hereinafter “instant office”) shall be comprised of three floors from the F and two others.

(2) On October 2010, the Defendant and H set up a monthly sub-lease fee of KRW 15,00,00 (including value-added tax, management fee, electricity tax, urban gas fee, etc.) and sub-lease the office of this case to the Defendant and H without any deposit. (2) The Defendant and H were to pay the unpaid rent of KRW 22,00,00,000 in installments from March 201 (hereinafter “instant payment note”) to the LAB, which succeeded to the LAE during which they did not pay the above sub-lease fee at all, and to the LAB, which succeeded to the LAE (mutual change to the Plaintiff on November 29, 2018), and to withdraw from the office of this case on January 25, 2011.

3) Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 22,00,000 won with 15% interest per annum from the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order to the day of complete payment. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff's claim was extinguished after the lapse of five years, which is the period of extinctive prescription of the commercial company. 2.0 million won and the claim for damages for delay (hereinafter "claim of this case").

(b)The claim for the payment of unpaid rent is as above, which applies the five-year extinctive prescription period in accordance with Article 64 of the Commercial Code, because it constitutes a claim arising from the Plaintiff’s commercial activity carrying on a real estate leasing business ( even if a separate payment agreement is made with respect to a commercial obligation, its nature does not change to a civil liability.

2. On March 16, 2018, after five years have passed since April 1, 2011, when the Defendant lost the benefit of time due to the Defendant’s failure to perform its obligation under the instant payment note.