1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall deliver to the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor the real estate indicated in the separate sheet.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 21, 2014, the counterclaim Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) stipulating that the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant store”) was leased to the Defendant as KRW 50 million, KRW 2.4 million per month, KRW 100,000 per month, and the lease term for five years from May 1, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. The Defendant, while running a E agency business at the instant store, completed the business on June 30, 2017 or on July 1, 2017, and removed from the instant store.

C. The instant lease agreement was terminated around April 30, 2019.

As to the entirety of the buildings indicated in the attached list, including the instant store, the counterclaim Defendant completed the registration of transfer on March 29, 2019 to F Co., Ltd. on the grounds of sale, and F Co., Ltd. completed the registration of transfer of ownership with the Plaintiff’s successor on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4 and 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The conclusion that the instant lease agreement on the principal lawsuit was terminated is as seen above, and the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor.

3. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. The Defendant asserted that he installed a toilet inside the instant shop with the consent of the counterclaim Defendant and used it. When water was leaked at the underground singing room under the instant store, the counterclaim Defendant deemed that the cause of the use of the toilet was due to the above toilet construction, and caused the Defendant to repair the floor after cutting water.

After that, as the number of counterclaims continued, the counterclaims did not cut off the water again, and did not cancel the fractional measure despite the defendant's request.

Accordingly, the Defendant is unable to conduct business at the instant store because it is considerably impossible to clean toilets, store rooms, and water purifiers, etc., and thus, the Defendant cannot conduct business at the instant store on June 2017.