1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 70,564,213 and the interest rate thereon from October 14, 2018 to the date of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 22, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) on the lease deposit amounting to KRW 60,000,000, monthly renting to KRW 4,000,000 (Additional Taxation), management expenses amounting to KRW 500,000, and lease period from April 30, 2015 to April 30, 2017. The Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement on the lease of real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Plaintiff to the Defendant Company.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant Company renewed the contract by setting the term of the lease by April 30, 2019, at KRW 4,350,000, which is the monthly rent among the terms of the said lease contract upon the termination of the said term of the lease.

(hereinafter referred to as the above (a) and the renewed lease contract as above (hereinafter referred to as the “instant lease”). C.

The Defendant Company delayed the payment of monthly rent under the instant lease agreement, and as of June 30, 2018, the sum of the rent delayed by the Defendant Company as of June 30, 2018 is KRW 70,564,213.

On the other hand, on January 8, 2018, Defendant D guaranteed the obligation of the Defendant Company to pay the rent to the Plaintiff according to the instant lease agreement, and prepared and issued a letter of payment guarantee.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 70,564,213 for the unpaid monthly rent and KRW 15% interest per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from October 14, 2018 to the date of full payment, following the day when the duplicate of the instant complaint was finally served on Defendant D.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.