1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) pays KRW 70,000,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

2. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. At around 2007, Co-owners E and F newly built multi-household housing (the name of the building: D 103 dong; hereinafter “instant building”) on the land outside Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, and four parcels. Although a building permit was issued to assign two houses for each floor on the first first to the first to the fourth to the fourth to the fourth to each floor, the construction work was completed by arbitrarily amending the building plan and dividing each floor into five studio households capable of independently residing in each quarter for the purpose of improving rent profitability.

On November 8, 2007, the competent administrative authority prepared a collective building register as a result of the existence of two households on each floor of the building of this case in accordance with the initial building plan.

E and F applied for registration of the preservation of ownership of an aggregate building on November 16, 2007, based on these aggregate building register, the registration of the preservation of ownership was completed by dividing only one floor of the instant building into 101 square meters, 46.08 square meters, 102 square meters, 75.96 square meters.

B. E and F affixed a mark of 101, 102, and 103 on the entrance door of the studio 3 households located in the space corresponding to 102, 75.96 square meters on the registry of the instant building, and attached a mark of 101, 102, and 103 square meters on the registry, attached an indication of 104, 105 square meters to the 2studio households located in the space corresponding to 101, 46.08 square meters on the registry, and leased each of them to the lessee.

(The difference between the indication on the register and the indication in fact in the building shall be as shown in the annexed drawing. In case of the number of houses which the project owner voluntarily gives in the building, it shall be referred to as "current subparagraph".

C. On December 12, 2007, the Plaintiff leased a deposit of KRW 70 million from E and F without a rent of KRW 104,00,000 for the current status, KRW 80,000 per month of management expenses, and from December 15, 2007 to December 14, 2008, the Plaintiff explained that the indication of the object of lease does not coincide with that on the register on the current status of the object of lease from the lessor at the time, and the lease contract (Evidence A No. 3) is made.