1. The Defendant’s KRW 85,649,48 from the Plaintiff and its related KRW 6% per annum from December 22, 2014 to January 26, 2016, and the following.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 7, 2011, the Plaintiff: (a) leased an office of 248 square meters of part 5 stories in the building for the purpose of the building for which part of 369-11 ground-water treatment is located on June 6, 2013; (b) lease deposit is KRW 100 million; (c) monthly rent is KRW 6.5 million (excluding value-added tax); and (d) monthly management fee is KRW 1 million (excluding value-added tax); and (e) the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 100 million as the lease deposit.

B. The plaintiff and the defendant are above A.

On July 31, 2012, the term of the lease agreement was changed from July 31, 2012 to July 30, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) to the 454.5 square meters (hereinafter “instant building”); the monthly rent of KRW 12 million (excluding value-added tax); monthly management expenses of KRW 1,937,50 (excluding value-added tax); monthly management expenses; and the term of the lease agreement was changed from July 31, 2012 to July 30, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. On July 31, 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a mortgage agreement with the Defendant on each real estate indicated in the separate sheet as to each real estate in order to secure the obligation to return the lease deposit amounting to KRW 100 million. The Defendant completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage over the maximum debt amounting to KRW 100 million (hereinafter “instant mortgage”) according to the aforementioned mortgage agreement with the Seoul Central District Court Registry No. 57944, Nov. 14, 2012.

On June 19, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the purport that “I will terminate the lease contract as of July 30, 2014, the expiration date of the contract”.

E. The plaintiff is above D.

On June 26, 2014, it is confirmed that the Defendant had no intention to renew the lease contract in accordance with the content certification sent by the Defendant on June 19, 2014. As such, the Defendant notified the Defendant of the content of the request for cooperation so that the facility can be removed and the restoration to its original state and its reputation can be completed.

F. The Defendant used the instant building as a business branch office, and transferred the instant building to the office around October 4, 2014.