1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,856,298 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 19% per annum from May 1, 2010 to April 10, 2015, and the following.

1. On January 31, 2008, the Defendant entered into a lease contract with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff entrusted with a general implementation agent by B-B (hereinafter “B-B-B-B-B-B-A-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-gu 3.9 square meters in exclusive use area, and 11.84 square meters in total with a total selling area) for KRW 125,950,000 in consideration of the price.

(hereinafter referred to as the “lease Sales Contract of this case”). The plaintiff and the defendant set the specific location of the store by lot after paying the above parcelling-out price (Article 1(2)), and settled the sales price according to the increase and decrease in the store size (Article 1(2)), and the overdue interest rate for the parcelling-out price is 19% per annum.

(3) Article 2(1) of the former Commercial Act provides that “The store shall have the exclusive use area of the store of this case and the exclusive use area of this case shall be 3.9 square meters, and the public use area shall be 11.84 square meters and the total sale area shall be 1.84 square meters.

Around March 2010, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the sale price, excluding the rental deposit, was settled in accordance with the exclusive area (based on 3.9 square meters) and that the rental deposit was settled in accordance with the sale area (based on 11.84 square meters), and issued the details of the settlement that the refund of the rental deposit was paid in KRW 4,019,00 after drawing, and notified the Plaintiff that the lease sale price determined by April 30, 2010 was KRW 121,931,000, and requested the payment thereof. The Defendant paid KRW 101,074,702 out of the lease price to the Plaintiff.

(v) The Defendant filed a lawsuit with the Plaintiff and the Nonparty Union seeking confirmation of the non-existence of the obligation to pay rent (hereinafter “previous lawsuit”) on January 2, 2014, as well as the other tenants of the said C commercial building as Seoul Central District Court 2010Kahap134177, on the ground of the invalidation, cancellation, or revocation, etc. of the lease sale contract as the primary claim against the Plaintiff and the Nonparty Union. On January 2, 2014, the said court rendered a decision to recommend reconciliation with respect to all the parties to the said lawsuit including the Plaintiff and the Defendant.