1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

A. The payment of KRW 600,000 is received from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed to exist;

A. On May 6, 2015, the Plaintiff leased 33.058 square meters inside a ship (hereinafter “instant building”) which connects each point of the items of the attached Form No. 1, B, C, D, and A among the buildings listed in the attached Form List to the Defendant as of May 6, 2015, with the lease deposit of KRW 5 million, KRW 8 million per month (payment in advance) and the lease term from June 1, 201 to May 31, 2013 as of May 31, 2013.

(hereinafter “Lease of this case”). (b)

After that, the lease of this case has been renewed continuously, and the Plaintiff, on March 10, 2016, sent to the Defendant the proof that the Plaintiff had expressed his intent to refuse the renewal on March 10, 2016, and terminated on May 31, 2016.

C. Meanwhile, in the instant lease agreement, the Defendant separately paid value-added tax on monthly rent from the Defendant, and the Defendant did not pay value-added tax amounting to KRW 4.4 million from June 1, 2011 to April 1, 2016.

(hereinafter “The value-added tax of this case”). 【The grounds for recognition / [the grounds for recognition] are not disputed, each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. 1) The fact that the instant lease contract was terminated upon the expiration of the period of validity as to the cause of the claim is as seen earlier. The Defendant’s duty to deliver the instant building and the Plaintiff’s duty to return the lease deposit is in the simultaneous performance relationship. Since the lease deposit guarantees all the lessee’s obligations, such as rent and unjust enrichment arising in relation to the lease between the lease and the delivery of the object after the termination of the lease, the lessor is obligated to return only the remainder remaining after deducting the amount. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the lease deposit amount at KRW 5 million after deducting the unpaid value-added tax of KRW 4,40,000 from the lease deposit at KRW 5 million, and to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff at the same time. 2) The Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant’s assertion