1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, KRW 28,800,000 against the Plaintiff and its related thereto from March 24, 2009 to April 27, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. The appellate court prior to the remanding of the trial scope of this Court accepted the defendant's appeal and revoked the judgment of the first instance, and dismissed the plaintiff's appeal. The plaintiff appealed against this, and the Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal as to the plaintiff's claim for alcoholic beverage price (the plaintiff claimed to pay KRW 6,125,000,000 among alcoholic beverage price) and remanded the part concerning the claim for monthly rent to this court.

Therefore, the scope of this court's trial is limited to the monthly tax claim.

2. Basic facts

A. On March 7, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a sublease contract with the Defendant on the 20-year store in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City (mutual D; hereinafter “instant business”) with the Plaintiff and the lessee as the Defendant.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

The defendant agreed with the plaintiff in the contract of this case that "the defendant shall operate the business of this case from March 7, 2008 to February 24, 2009, and without a deposit, all of the monthly and public charges of KRW 2.4 million per month, and the damage to the house shall be borne without a deposit, and the contract shall be blank at the time of the unpaid rent for three months or longer, and the total amount of KRW 28.8 million shall be maintained and compensated as is."

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 2, 4, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleading

3. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total monthly rent of 28.8 million won as stipulated in the contract of this case and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from March 24, 2009 to April 27, 2016, which is the date of the ruling of the court of the first instance, after remanding the case where it is deemed reasonable to dispute about the scope of the defendant's obligation to pay to the plaintiff as requested by the plaintiff.

The Act was amended by Presidential Decree No. 26553 on September 25, 2015 and enforced October 1, 2015.