1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff)

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

(b) 5,427,840 won;

Basic Facts

On July 17, 2019, the Plaintiff leased the lease deposit of KRW 5,00,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,300,000, and the term of lease from July 15, 2019 to July 31, 2021, the second floor neighborhood living facilities of KRW 180.99 square meters (the portion of the building indicated in the attached Table; hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) among the buildings located in Jeju-si D, from the Defendant during the period of lease.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). On September 6, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,500,000 as a deposit for lease.

[Ground of recognition] The plaintiff asserted that Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings by the parties concerned, and the plaintiff leased the above building from the defendant to operate the restaurant in the building of this case.

However, although the building of this case cannot be permitted as a general restaurant due to the capacity of septic tanks, the defendant did not notify the plaintiff.

Due to such unlawful acts by the Defendant, the Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to KRW 18,00,000,000 in total with the expenses for interior and board of directors, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for such damages.

The defendant's assertion and the summary of the counterclaim are clearly notified that the plaintiff is unable to operate the general restaurant in the building of this case before entering into the lease contract of this case, but there is no problem in running the resting restaurant business.

The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant did not comply with the duty of disclosure is not true, because the plaintiff was aware of this fact and leased the same while operating a resting restaurant in the above building.

Rather, the Defendant did not pay the lease deposit stipulated in the instant lease agreement.

Accordingly, the defendant shall terminate the above lease contract by delivery of the written reply of this case.

Therefore, the defendant delivered the building of this case to the plaintiff as a counterclaim, and paid rent, unpaid electricity fee, and restitution cost from October to December 2019.