1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 50,000,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the amount from May 1, 2017 to July 6, 2017.

1. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff, as the main claim of the lawsuit, operated the Daz ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck ck c

As a counter-claim, the defendant does not exempt the lessee from the duty to restore the building, but rather, the lessee is obligated to remove the KIKO and restore the building to its original condition or transfer the building to the lessor as it is, according to the lessor's choice. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff is seeking to remove the KIKO and restore the original condition to its original condition.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Nonparty Company on the following terms (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with the lease deposit amount of KRW 50 million and the lease deposit period of KRW 50 million from May 2013 to April 2019, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Nonparty Company with the following terms and conditions (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

The object of lease: The lease deposit for six years (from May 1, 2013 to April 30, 2019) (from 12 stores in total; hereinafter referred to as "the instant store"): the monthly rent of KRW 50 million: the special agreement of KRW 14 million:

1. The application of the Agent: Before May 1, 2013, May 1, 2013, - April 30, 2017, about 48 months.