1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) amounting to KRW 827,100 and its amount from January 20, 2016 to September 1, 2016.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 10, 2013, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff, setting a deposit of KRW 30,000,000, and KRW 1,500,000 per month of rent (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the leased object, among the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 list, as indicated in the attached Table 1, on September 10, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

At the time, the original defendant may remodel or alter the leased object of this case with the approval of the defendant, but agreed to restore the leased object to its original state at the expense of the plaintiff prior to the date of return of

B. On March 23, 2015, while the Plaintiff was engaged in restaurant business using the leased object of the instant case, the Plaintiff completed the business report on the place of business after receiving the report on the business report on the location of the leased object of the instant case at the place of business (hereinafter “instant business report”).

C. Around September 2015, the Plaintiff delivered the instant leased object to the Defendant, and the Defendant paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff, as part of the deposit under the instant lease agreement, on September 23, 2015.

The Plaintiff did not pay to the Defendant the sum of KRW 18,00,000,000 for the rent from September 10, 2014 to September 10, 2015 under the instant lease agreement.

E. From August 8, 2015 to September 7, 2015, the Defendant paid to the Korea Electric Power Corporation the aggregate of KRW 102,790,00 from June 10, 2015 to September 20, 2015 to the Korea Electric Power Corporation, respectively, KRW 102,790, which occurred with respect to the leased object of the instant case, and also from September 8, 2015 to September 20, 2015 to KRW 69,520, which occurred with respect to the leased object of the instant case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 20 to 25

2. Determination on the main claim

A. According to the fact that the above part of the claim for the refund of deposit is recognized, the lease of this case was terminated upon the expiration of the period, so the defendant is the plaintiff.