1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A Co., Ltd. shall pay KRW 22,861,525 and the interest thereon from August 30, 2016 to the date of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 6, 2008, the Plaintiff leased (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) a deposit deposit of 351,00,000,000 square meters to F Co., Ltd. (F), five years from May 6, 200 to August 3, 2013, five years from May 90, 2008, the rent of 39,000,000,000, and the business type of business (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

On November 16, 2009, the rental deposit was changed to 354,966,030 won, the contract area was 2,183.8 square meters, and the rent was changed to 39,440,670 won per month.

B. On September 16, 2010, Defendant A Co., Ltd. determined 28 units of the instant commercial building (area of 18.5 square meters) from F as KRW 15 million and monthly rent of KRW 1.2 million and used the said commercial building as its store from around that time to June 25, 2013.

C. On August 7, 2010, the Defendant C (the spouse of F representative G) transferred 50 square meters (20 square meters) from F among the instant commercial buildings, and on August 7, 2010, the Defendant B’s name appears to be Nonparty H, but the actual employer is the Defendant B.

A deposit amount of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.2 million was set and the contract was terminated on December 2010, and on December 13, 2010, the above commercial building was transferred to Defendant B at Defendant B’s request, and the contract was concluded on the said commercial building again by setting the monthly rent of KRW 90,000 without a deposit.

Defendant B used the said commercial building as a store from December 27, 2010 in accordance with the newly concluded pre-sale contract, and delivered it to the Plaintiff on July 4, 2013.

Defendant C brought a lawsuit against Defendant B and Nonparty C seeking the payment of the rent of KRW 14.1 million in arrears based on the pre-lease contract that was newly concluded by the Seoul Central District Court 2012Kadan168528. In this case, Defendant C argued to the effect that Defendant C could not file a claim for rent as long as the instant lease contract was terminated by the Plaintiff, since it was merely a sub-lessee without permission. Accordingly, the dismissal judgment was rendered.

On the other hand.