1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall:

A. From 14,150,000 won to 14,150,00 won, the list from October 1, 201 to 1.

Basic Facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the building listed in the attached Table 1 list (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. In around 1988, the Plaintiff leased part (a) of the attached drawing Nos. 1 to 4, and 1 among the instant building to the Defendant, which was connected in turn to the Defendant, over several times since the lease of 29.752 square meters (hereinafter “instant store”). The Defendant has operated the restaurant in the same name as “C” from the time of the initial lease from the point of lease to the date of the initial lease.

C. The time when the Plaintiff and the Defendant last renewed the lease is 2013.

In other words, in 2012, the Plaintiff renewed the existing lease by preparing a store lease contract in which the Defendant and the Defendant entered the leased object into the instant store, the period from May 1, 2012 to November 30, 2013 (the “2013.11.31” stated in the contract appears to be a simple clerical error), the lease deposit is 30 million won, and the monthly rent is 0 million won. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into the said contract in 2013, with the “monthly rent” added to the “monthly rent” column of the said contract, and the term of the lease was renewed by revising the term to “ December 30, 2016.”

(hereinafter referred to as the above, the lease contract finally renewed is referred to as the “instant lease contract”).

On November 3, 2016, November 24, 2016, and December 8, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a written notification stating that the instant lease agreement will be terminated on December 30, 2016 due to the expiration of the period, and that the instant contract will be terminated on December 30, 2016, and that the delivery of the instant store would be changed by December 31, 2016, and closed the existing account in receipt of remittance from the Defendant.

E. On February 16, 2017, the Defendant deposited 4.4 million won under the name of the rent with the Plaintiff as the principal deposit.

(No. 165. [Grounds for Recognition] / [No. 165] / [Case A] 1-2, Evidence No. 2-1-3, and Evidence No. 2-1-3, respectively.