1. The defendant receives KRW 22,500,000 from the plaintiffs, and at the same time, the second floor of the building in the attached list to the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 11, 2013, the Plaintiffs leased the commercial buildings listed in Paragraph (1) of the Disposition (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”) owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”) as KRW 50,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 3,500,000 [Attachment to Value-Added Tax, and KRW 3,000,000,00 as mutual agreement on April 201, 2015 (excluding value-added tax)] on the lease deposit, and on December 22, 2013 through December 21, 2015, the period of lease was set and leased as KRW 3,00,000 (excluding value-added tax).

(B) The lease agreement entered into between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

The shopping mall of this case is a place where the plaintiffs operated the main points using the collection of table and table (hereinafter "the instant collection of table"). The "rights transfer contract" prepared by the plaintiffs and the defendant on December 12, 2013 provides that "the transferee defendant is obligated to pay 190,000,000 won to the plaintiffs who are the transferor in the name of the facility cost (which means the premium). The plaintiffs are obligated to remove all the obstacles to the exercise of the right of lease, receive the total amount of the facility cost, and hand over all the facilities including all facilities so that the defendant can run his/her business immediately (Article 2)." The "business transfer and takeover contract" written by the plaintiffs and the defendant on the same day is provided that "the plaintiff comprehensively transfers all the rights and obligations concerning the main business operated by the plaintiff to the defendant."

C. On December 22, 2013, the Defendant paid all the above lease deposit and premium to the Plaintiffs, received delivery from the Plaintiffs, and operated the instant shopping mall using the instant shopping mall. As an implied renewal of the instant lease agreement was achieved, the Defendant continued to operate the instant shopping mall after December 2015, and decided to terminate the instant lease agreement on December 21, 2017 by mutual consent with the Plaintiffs on September 11, 2017. On December 22, 2017, the Defendant released the key of the instant shopping mall from the Plaintiffs to the NAju.

On the other hand, however,