1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

As to the plaintiff's claim against the defendant of KRW 300 million.

1. Basic facts

A. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance, other than adding a part as follows, is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Five (5) below the fifth table of the judgment of the court of first instance followed the following: “The initial date of the rent shall be from 01 October 201, 201 to be applicable.”

"Grounds: Shall be suspended from the application of rents during the period of supplementary facilities and interior of each floor, education of employees, and practical training."

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. Even after September 21, 2009, the Plaintiff’s use of the building was much hindered since the interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior of the instant building was not completed.

Accordingly, on January 24, 2010, the Plaintiff succeeded to the existing “former Lease Contract” between D and the Defendant as it is, but entered into the instant lease contract with the Defendant with the effect that, while changing the lease term of seven years (84 months) and the monthly rent of KRW 265 million into two years and six months (30 months) and KRW 200 million, the rent for the year 2009, which occurred in king in accordance with the “former Lease Contract.”

Therefore, the sum of the unpaid rent and management expenses from January 2010 to December 2010, 271,765,883 won, and the late payment charges from the sum of the unpaid rent and management expenses from January 2010 to December 2010, 271,765,883 won, and the late payment charges of 6.6 billion won, 585,698,629 won, all of which are 3,437,464,512 won.

Therefore, the Defendant shall pay the remainder of the lease deposit of this case remaining after deducting the above amount to the Plaintiff (=4,400,000,000 - 3,437,464,512) and damages for delay.

B. The reasons why the Defendant’s assertion was concluded on January 24, 2010 that the starting date of the instant lease agreement should be applied from January 1, 2010 are calculated based on the change of the rent amount.