1. The Defendant’s KRW 29,082,90 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from September 11, 2015 to January 13, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 27, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract with the Defendant, setting the lease period from February 2, 2012 to February 10, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”) to KRW 50,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,300,000 (in addition tax 10%, separate management expenses, and payment terms after the tenth day of each month), and operated the instant shopping district on delivery after paying the lease deposit.

B. Around April 2014, the Plaintiff left the U.S. and lived in the U.S., and Nonparty E purchased facilities located in the instant commercial building from the Plaintiff’s wife F on May 21, 2015, the Defendant changed the store lock number to prevent E from entering the instant commercial building.

C. Since then, on June 6, 2015, the Plaintiff’s agent G attorney-at-law and the Defendant’s agent-at-law consulted with the following contents.

① On June 6, 2015, among the facilities owned by the lessee in the instant commercial building, the entire facilities except the government-managed fish containers were taken out to E designated by the lessee, and the lessor completed delivery of the object of real estate.

(2) The consultation on the settlement of the rent in arrears and reinstatement shall be made within three months (three months after the date of this consultation) for the lease after the date of this consultation, and shall be made before September 10, 2015.

(3) If the following lease contract is concluded within the period referred to in the preceding paragraph, the scope of recovery shall be agreed with the following lessee:

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the termination of the instant contract was effective as of May 10, 2015 upon the notice of termination as of February 10, 2015, and thereafter, there was no fact that the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant commercial building. Accordingly, the Defendant was on the February 2, 2014 and April 2, 2015.