1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 17,219,316 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from October 14, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the statements or images of Gap evidence 1-1, 2, and 3-1, 3-2, and the appraisal results of appraiser C and the whole purport of the arguments. A.

On December 22, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the lease of approximately KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,000 (excluding value-added tax), and KRW 225,00,00 (excluding value-added tax) for the lease of approximately 35,00,00 (hereinafter “instant store”) on the south south of the first floor of the building in Seocheon-si D (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”). At that time, the Defendant paid the said deposit to the Plaintiff and began to use the instant store upon delivery from the Plaintiff.

B. On January 26, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a monthly rent of KRW 500,000 (excluding value-added tax) and the lease period of 12 months for the remaining slive slive 30 square meters (hereinafter “instant site”) among the instant site D site owned by the Plaintiff, and the Defendant began to use the instant site upon delivery from the Plaintiff around that time.

C. The Defendant, while running the laundry business at the instant store, installed the entrance (hereinafter “instant entrance”) following the partial removal of the other side windows (hereinafter “the instant entrance”). The Defendant installed the equipment, such as the launds, walls, floors, etc. for the installation of machinery, ② the water supply, electricity and drainage facilities, ③ the signboard and the stample, and ④ the instant laundg, and ⑤ the facilities for the laundbing position panel (hereinafter “the instant facilities” by combining the above and the above) on the instant Bridge site.

On May 8, 2017, when the instant lawsuit was pending, the Defendant transferred the possession of the instant store and the site to the Plaintiff, but did not remove the entrance doors and facilities of the instant case.