1. The defendant points out of the real estate listed in the separate sheet from the plaintiff, as indicated in the separate sheet, such as ①, ②, ③, ④, and ①.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 3, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 60 million, from September 22, 2014 to September 22, 2016, with respect to the lease deposit of approximately KRW 21.24 square meters inboard (hereinafter “instant real estate”) connected each point in sequence with the Defendant, among the real estate listed in the separate sheet, (i) indicated in the separate sheet with the Defendant, and (ii), (iii), (iv), and (i) paid KRW 60 million to the Defendant.

B. Around March 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant lease contract would not be renewed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of the judgment on the cause of the claim, since the lease contract of this case was terminated upon the expiration of the period, the defendant is obligated to return the lease deposit amount of KRW 60 million to the plaintiff simultaneously with the delivery of the real estate of this case from the plaintiff.

3. The defendant's argument regarding the defendant's assertion that the defendant cannot return the lease deposit because of the plaintiff's provisional seizure of real estate, because of the plaintiff's failure to make a new lessee, but the above circumstance alone does not allow the return of

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

4. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is reasonable.