1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the instant case

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant’s sub-lease 1) The Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant Docle Friet Co., Ltd. on March 18, 201 (hereinafter “non-party company”).

2) From the perspective of the instant commercial building, the third floor of the third floor neighborhood living facilities located in the Seoul metropolitan living facility (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) is owned by the non-party company.

) The lease deposit was set at KRW 1.2 billion, and the lease was leased for five years from the date of designation of occupancy in the lease term (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

(2) At the time, the Defendant and the non-party company may sub-lease the instant commercial building to revitalize the commercial building; however, the sub-lessee designated by the Defendant obtained the prior consent of the non-party company; and the non-party company agreed to the sub-lessee designated by the Defendant that the non-party company had the authority to examine the qualifications, etc. of the sub-lessee. (2) The Plaintiff entered into a sub-lease contract with the Plaintiff and the Defendant around March 2012, determined the instant commercial building from the Defendant by the end of October 2012 without the sub-lease deposit.

(hereinafter “The instant sub-lease contract”). At the time, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 1 billion to the Defendant during the period of sub-lease and take over the right of lease of the Defendant to the instant commercial building.

At the time, the plaintiff and the defendant prepared a sub-lease contract (No. 3-1) but did not enter the preparation date.

B. On March 2012, the Plaintiff of the instant shopping mall entered into a contract for the interior construction of the instant shopping mall with D and its construction period up to June 2012, and with the construction cost of KRW 24 million up to 200 million. Accordingly, D had the interior construction of the instant shopping mall from April 2012 to June 2012, but did not receive the construction cost from the Plaintiff.

C. On September 14, 2012, the non-party company filed a claim suit, such as transfer of a building on the instant commercial building, following the lapse of the lawsuit regarding the instant commercial building.