1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 4, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2:

The Plaintiff’s status as the Plaintiff entered into a comprehensive implementation contract with the Fmarket Reconstruction Association (hereinafter “instant association”) which promoted the new construction project of E commercial buildings on the ground and underground of 4,144.3m2 in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”) around September 12, 2002, which is the land for the Dongdaemun-gu B market and C market, and entered into a lease-sale agency contract with the Fmarket Reconstruction Association (hereinafter “instant association”).

B. (1) On August 22, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a lease sale agreement with the Defendant on the three-story unit (3.9m2) of the instant commercial building (3.9m2, the exclusive use area of the Gu unit) as indicated in the attached list, with regard to the lease sale price of KRW 98,00,00 (excluding value-added tax) (hereinafter “lease sale agreement”).

See The Defendant entered into the instant lease agreement and prepared a written confirmation (hereinafter referred to as “instant confirmation”) as follows:

In the conclusion of the lease contract for the right to lease of a sectioned store in the commercial building of this case, I confirm that the lease contract of this case is a lease contract, and that the lease price includes the lease deposit, and that only the lease deposit is refunded from the lessor at the time of termination of the lease contract with the lessor, I do not raise any objection against this.

C. Around February 2010, the Defendant: (i) won at the store’s 151st floor (hereinafter “instant store”); and (ii) the exclusive use area of the instant store decreased to 3.29 square meters; and (iii) around February 2010, the Defendant won at the store’s 151st floor (hereinafter “instant store”).