1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff asserted that, around February 2008, the Plaintiff leased the instant store owned by the Plaintiff to the Defendant without a deposit as KRW 1.5 million per month, and the Defendant’s delayed payment of rent from around 2010, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff.

2. Examining whether the Defendant agreed to rent the instant store at KRW 1.5 million per month between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and delayed payment of the rent, the evidence, such as the statement of evidence No. 2, presented by the Plaintiff, is insufficient to recognize it in light of the following circumstances.

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings and videos on the evidence Nos. 3 through 11 and 15 (including virtual numbers, and evidence No. 15 is presumed to have been authentic in the entire document due to the lack of dispute over the Defendant’s stamp image portion), the Plaintiff, on March 7, 2005, purchased the ownership of the building listed in the attached list for the value of 3,313 square meters, E prior to 2,293 square meters, F. 1,638 square meters, G prior to G, 1,644 square meters, and HH 2,350 square meters, etc., and the Plaintiff, on the following grounds: (a) on March 7, 2005, the Plaintiff, who was the husband and wife, was entitled to take part in the marriage type of the Defendant’s claim for consolation money with the Defendant’s marriage status on November 5, 201; (b) on April 2013, 2014.

As such, the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s father C appears to have contributed significantly to acquiring the ownership of the instant store due to the very difficult relationship, and contrary to the Plaintiff’s assertion, they are the difference regarding the instant store.