1. The Defendant’s KRW 34,656,343 as well as 5% per annum from March 1, 2017 to October 16, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 30, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a lease extension contract with the Plaintiff, the Defendant, the lessor, and the period of extension of the lease from October 31, 2016 to February 28, 2017, the monthly rent of KRW 28,900,000, and the lease deposit amount of KRW 270,000,000 with respect to the Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan Factory Building.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant lease contract” and the object of the said contract is referred to as the “instant factory”). B.

On March 6, 2017, after the termination of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant returned KRW 200 million out of the lease deposit of this case to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute (including the fact that the plaintiff was a person), entries in Gap evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. On or before February 28, 2017, the date of termination of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff requested the Plaintiff to deliver the instant factory to the Defendant and return the instant lease deposit. However, since the Defendant returned only KRW 270 million out of the lease deposit of this case after the termination of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 38,100,880, which deducts rents (including value-added tax) and management expenses, etc. for the unpaid lease deposit of KRW 70,000 from KRW 70,000,000,000, and KRW 38,100,000,000,000 after the completion of the instant lease agreement. (2) The Plaintiff did not obtain substantial benefits by using the instant factory after the termination of the lease agreement, and as long as the Defendant did not refund the deposit in full, it cannot be said that the Plaintiff has the obligation to pay the Plaintiff unjust enrichment

B. As the Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion had received the instant factory from March 17, 2017, the following amount should be deducted from the lease deposit, and the Defendant did not return the lease deposit.

In addition, the plaintiff should dispose of the factory of this case, such as a joint board and a stuff.