1. The counterclaim of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is in the subdivision-gu B of Sungnam-si.

1. We examine, ex officio, whether the defendant's counterclaim is legitimate or not.

A defendant may, only if it does not remarkably delay the litigation procedures, file a counterclaim with the court in which the principal lawsuit is pending not later than the closure of pleadings.

(1) Article 269(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “The counterclaim of this case shall be filed on May 7, 2015, which was after the date of closing the argument, and the defendant filed a counterclaim of this case on April 15, 2015.” The counterclaim of this case is based on the special occupation contract between the plaintiff and the defendant, which is the cause of the counterclaim of this case, but the main lawsuit seeks to deliver the store to its original original original state, and the counterclaim of this case shall seek the payment of the general cost incurred before the termination of the contract of this case. The counterclaim of this case is not in a related relationship with the plaintiff's performance, and each of the above obligations cannot be seen as having been determined relatively promptly. The counterclaim of this case is a claim for monetary payment and it is difficult to obtain general security by means of provisional attachment, etc. in light of the plaintiff's status, etc., and it is difficult to deem it necessary to receive a written answer with the main lawsuit of this case after the defendant submitted the written answer within 15th 1015th of the date of this case.

Therefore, the counterclaim of this case is inappropriate as being raised after the closing of argument, and thus, it is dismissed without holding any pleadings pursuant to Article 219 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination on the main claim

A. Basic facts (1) On April 12, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are C in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si.