1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) pays KRW 800,000 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

2. The principal lawsuit of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, as the owner of the real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant real estate”), requested C, a licensed real estate agent for the first time on December 2013, to engage in brokerage of entering into a lease agreement with the content that the instant real estate is leased in KRW 10 million and KRW 400,000,000 monthly income.

B. The Defendant expressed his intent to rent the instant real estate through C, but it suggested that the Plaintiff would change the terms and conditions presented by the Plaintiff and wish to rent KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 450,000.

C. On December 16, 2013, the Defendant deposited KRW 500,000,000, which is the amount equivalent to 1/10 of the deposit that C proposed as a down payment in the Plaintiff’s deposit account known by C without preparing a lease contract.

On December 18, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a construction project to replace a remote area and a plate of the apartment of this case.

The defendant was prepared to move into the apartment by temporarily putting the keys from C into the apartment, confirming the indoor water control, filing an application for the installation of urban gas.

E. The Plaintiff and the Defendant, via C, directly prepared a mutual agreement or a contract on December 21, 2013, and concluded the remainder and the delivery of the object on the day.

F. However, on December 20, 2012, the Defendant had expressed his intent to reconsider the contract with the Defendant as the Defendant demanded matters, such as the replacement of the corrective device, the repair of the motor vehicle, etc., and C sent to the Defendant on December 20, 2012 the letter “Is the time to draw up the contract in a fixed manner due to the failure to set the contract.”

G. On December 21, 2012, the scheduled occupancy date, the Plaintiff did not contact the Defendant, unlike the commitment.

However, the defendant replaced the correction device by himself and remitted 4.5 million won to the plaintiff's deposit account.

H. The plaintiff removed the correction device installed by the defendant on the following day and demanded the defendant's eviction, but the defendant rejected it until now.