1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant’s judgment based on the Seoul High Court Decision 2011Na87381, supra.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 2004, the Plaintiff and the deceased C (the deceased on January 15, 2017; hereinafter “the deceased”) purchased the first floor E commercial building underground of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) jointly and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 30, 2005, respectively.

On October 7, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a written agreement on the purchase price and lease of the instant commercial building with the Deceased, stating that “The Deceased paid KRW 700 million in cash while purchasing the instant commercial building and replaced the remainder with bank loans. The Plaintiff paid to the Deceased the amount exceeding 1/2. The instant commercial building was operated as a restaurant, and the Plaintiff paid the Plaintiff rent and paid bank loans to the Deceased.” On the same day, on the same day, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (including the payment from January 2006 to October 31, 2006, including value-added tax) with respect to the instant commercial building as of October 31, 2006 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The lease agreement was concluded as of KRW 440 million (including value-added tax) on the same day from January 206 to October 41, 2007 after the said lease was renewed.

B. On September 17, 2010, the deceased filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the purchase price of the instant commercial building, the payment of unpaid rents under the instant lease agreement, and the transfer of the instant commercial building following the termination of the said lease agreement. On September 30, 201, the court rendered a judgment on September 30, 201 that “the Plaintiff shall deliver the instant commercial building to the deceased,” on the ground that the Plaintiff’s claim for the purchase price of the instant commercial building and the unpaid rent was without merit, but the instant lease agreement was terminated due to the delayed payment of two or more vehicles.”

C. The Plaintiff and the Deceased appealed respectively, and on December 12, 2012, the Seoul High Court 201Na87381 (Seoul High Court 201Na87381) accepted some of the purchase price and the claim for unpaid rent of the instant commercial building in addition to the Plaintiff’s request for extradition, “The Plaintiff was accepted as part of the purchase price and the claim for unpaid rent.”