1. The counterclaim claim filed in the trial is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit incurred by the counterclaim are assessed against the Counterclaim Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. Around July 16, 2012, the counterclaim entered into an agreement on the consignment operation of welfare facilities with the content that the counterclaim Defendant entered into a contract on the consignment operation of a golf practice range, a fitness range, a fishing big facility (hereinafter “instant leased object”) among welfare facilities in the A apartment complex in esisi (hereinafter “instant leased object”), 4 million won, a monthly rent (welfare facility repair reserve), and a period from July 23, 2012 to July 22, 2015, with the content that the counterclaim Defendant leases to the Lessee during the period from July 23, 2012 to July 22, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). After the expiration of the contract under Article 9 (Operation Right of Welfare Facilities and Ownership), all facilities operation rights and ownership are against the counterclaim Defendant.

Article 18 (Ownership) All investment parts (such as facilities, sports equipment, screen golf facilities, etc.) necessary for the operation of welfare facilities are owned by the counterclaim defendant after the termination of the contract.

B. Meanwhile, the instant lease agreement provides for the following terms concerning the ownership of facilities, etc.:

(hereinafter referred to as “instant agreement”). C.

On June 1, 2015, the counterclaim Defendant notified the Lessee that “the instant lease agreement will be terminated upon the expiration of the contract term.” On August 3, 2015, the term of the said lease agreement expired, and notified that “the leased object should be returned in accordance with the foregoing notice of termination of the contract, and shall be restored to its original state,” around August 3, 2015.

The counterclaim Defendant rejected the foregoing demand by the counterclaim, and was rendered a favorable judgment on August 28, 2016 by filing a lawsuit against the counterclaim on August 14, 2015, seeking delivery of the leased object of this case and return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from July 23, 2015 to the completion date.

(2) The counterclaim of this case constitutes the part of the claim of this case, and the counterclaim of this case was withdrawn by the court of first instance).

On May 23, 2016, after the above judgment was rendered, the counterclaim of this case was filed.