1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the Parties:

On April 23, 2011, in order to use the part of the first floor (hereinafter “instant building”) among the third floor above the ground C from the Defendant as a restaurant, the Plaintiff leased KRW 50,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,500,000, and the term of lease from May 15, 201 to May 14, 2013.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant extended the lease term by 12 months (by May 24, 2014) around May 2013.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the facts of paragraph 1, the above lease terminated at the expiration of the term, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the sum of KRW 4,200,000 (the plaintiff has reduced the monthly rent of KRW 1,400,000 for the above 12-month period, which is the sum of the rent of KRW 4,200,000 for the above 12-month period, and the plaintiff did not pay the sum of the rent of KRW 4,200,000 (3 months) for the above 3-month period).) other than the sum of KRW 45,80,000 for the above 12-month period.

B. The Plaintiff also claims damages for delay of KRW 45,800,000.

However, the obligation to return the above lease deposit is in the simultaneous performance relationship with the obligation to restore and deliver the building of this case, and since the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have fulfilled the obligation to restore it to the original state as seen in the following 3-b, it cannot be said that there was damages for delay.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of additional deduction

A. 1) Since the monthly rent of the instant building was not reduced for 12 months, the rent that has not been paid for the extended 12 months is KRW 5,400,000 in total, including KRW 90,000,000 ( KRW 1,500,000) paid by the Plaintiff only for 1,40,000 for 9 months, which was not paid by the Plaintiff, and KRW 1,40,000 in total. In addition, since the Plaintiff continuously occupied and used the instant building from April 2015 after the termination of the said lease, the Plaintiff continued to occupy and use the said building for 18,00,000,000, which is equivalent to the rent for the said period ( KRW 1,500,000).