1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) to KRW 157,636,429 to the attached list from August 22, 2017.

A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 7, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the instant occupied portion of KRW 255,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 6,000,00 (excluding value-added tax), and the lease period from October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2012, setting the lease agreement to ensure that the initial lease period is five years from the first lease date when the contract terms are not violated (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. According to the above lease agreement, the Defendant operates a marina with the trade name “C” in the occupied part of the instant case, and on March 25, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the content certification to deliver the occupied part by September 30, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 3 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant lease agreement was terminated at the expiration of the term, and the Defendant is running the instant area in possession, but did not pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from April 1, 2016.

The Defendant is obligated to deliver the part of the instant possession to the Plaintiff and pay the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from April 1, 2016 to the above delivery.

B. The Defendant asserted that: (a) the Defendant paid KRW 200,000,000 for the premium; and (b) requested a person who wishes to be the lessee of the occupied part of the instant case; (c) however, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that he/she had concluded a new lease agreement by bidding on July 13, 2015, prior to the expiration of the instant lease agreement; and (d) notified the Defendant that he/she had concluded a new lease agreement

This is because the lessee deprived the defendant of the opportunity to recover the premium, so the plaintiff should compensate the defendant for damages of KRW 200,000,000.

The defendant seeks the balance set off between the above damage claim and the plaintiff's claim for return of unjust enrichment by the end of June 2017 as a counterclaim.

The defendant won the previous lawsuit against the plaintiff.