1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 80,000,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the same from December 16, 2014 to the date of full payment.

1. Determination on the main claim

A. On March 26, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease deposit amounting to KRW 80 million and the period from April 15, 2008 to April 15, 2009, with respect to the amount of KRW 72.51 square meters of the non-story C, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul (hereinafter the instant real estate) owned by the Defendant, and paid the said deposit amount around that time.

Since then, the above lease was renewed on April 15, 201, which was terminated on the grounds of the expiration or termination of the period, and the Plaintiff transferred the instant real estate to the Defendant prior to the closing date of the pleadings in this case.

【A without any dispute, described in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including family number evidence)】

B. Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 80 million won with 20% interest per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the day following the sentencing date of this case until the day of full payment, as the plaintiff seeks.

2. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. The summary of the counterclaim claim is on March 26, 2008, the Defendant purchased the instant real estate owned by the Plaintiff from the Plaintiff as KRW 95 million. Around that time, the Defendant paid KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff, and on the same day, leased the said real estate to the Plaintiff with KRW 45 million, and did not receive the remainder of the purchase price as a substitute for the payment of KRW 45 million.

However, the defendant's husband and the real estate who are individuals in D's real estate entered the lease deposit amount of KRW 80 million in the actual waterway lease contract, which is a private individual, and the defendant is responsible for returning the above deposit amount of KRW 80 million to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant has caused the Plaintiff to pay KRW 35 million more than KRW 95 million, which was agreed upon as the purchase price for real estate, to the Plaintiff, which was more than KRW 130 million, and thus, the Defendant shall have the Plaintiff refunded KRW 35 million from the above excessive purchase price.

B. We examine the judgment, as well as the above.