1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. On January 9, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff leased D units of the lease deposit amounting to KRW 120 million among the four business facilities of reinforced concrete structure located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, with the period from February 10, 2017 to February 9, 2019.

However, on September 15, 2017, the Plaintiff sold the instant building to E with KRW 2.455 billion (the intermediate payment is KRW 245 million) and agreed to remove the existing tenants by November 27, 2017 and deliver the instant building to E.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff explained such circumstances and paid up to 2 million won as directors' expenses, and left most of the tenants of the instant building. The Defendant only demanded the Plaintiff to pay 15 million won director's expenses and refused to leave.

Accordingly, on November 23, 2017, the Plaintiff, who was placed in the old place where the sales contract was rescinded and the down payment should be repaid, paid KRW 12 million to the Defendant on November 23, 2017 without having to leave the Defendant.

However, this is an unfair juristic act, which is null and void in violation of Article 104 of the Civil Act, and thus, the defendant is obligated to return to the plaintiff the amount exceeding KRW 10 million of the ordinary director cost paid from the plaintiff, which exceeds KRW 2 million.

2. Determination as follows: (a) a lease contract and a sales contract was concluded as alleged by the Plaintiff; and (b) the Plaintiff paid 12 million won to the Defendant on November 23, 2017 at the director’s expense; and (c) around that time, the fact that the Defendant moved out from the building of this case may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as stated in the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and No. 2-1.

However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings, that is, the situation in which the Plaintiff asserted remains in the lease contract period with the Defendant.