1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) From June 15, 2010 to December 30, 2015, the Seoul Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 101 floor C (hereinafter “instant store”) is the Defendant.

) The lease deposit was leased at KRW 30,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 150,000, management fee of KRW 150,000,000, and interest rate on delay on rent and management fee of KRW 150,000, and KRW 5% per month. 2) The Defendant did not pay monthly rent and water fee to the Plaintiff as listed in the table below.

(A) On July 5, 2016, the Plaintiff partly amended the claim on the date and time of the occurrence of the rent alleged to be in arrears by the Defendant in the preparatory document, but did not modify the purport of the claim.

The defendant's assertion did not agree to pay both the rent and the management fee on the corresponding date and time when the plaintiff asserts at the due date, and to pay the water fee separately from the management fee.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff leased the instant store to the Defendant on May 31, 2010 as the lease deposit amount of KRW 30,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,500,000, monthly management fee of KRW 150,000, monthly management fee of KRW 150,000, and the lease term of KRW 150,000, from June 15, 2010 to June 14, 2012, and the fact that the lease contract for the instant store was terminated at early around the beginning of 2015.

B. However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 through 17 (including each number), it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant’s rent obligations against the Plaintiff were extinguished on the ground of repayment, and it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the water rate of KRW 20,000 per month on the sole basis of the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

1) The Defendant submitted financial data concerning the payment of rent (which claimed that the Plaintiff was unpaid) or submitted a tax invoice for the relevant monthly rent (which was issued by the Plaintiff) issued by the Plaintiff, by asserting that all of the rents claimed by the Plaintiff were unpaid.