1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning the counterclaim in the judgment shall be modified as follows:

Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. Scope of the judgment of this court;

A. The first instance court dismissed all of the Plaintiff’s claims, and partly accepted the Defendant’s primary counterclaim.

(A) did not determine any claim for preliminary counterclaim. (b)

On the judgment of the court of first instance, only the plaintiff appealed, but the plaintiff does not object to the part of the claim of the principal lawsuit, and the plaintiff is seeking partial alteration of the part of the claim of the main counterclaim and dismissal of the claim of the main counterclaim.

C. Accordingly, the scope of the Court’s trial is limited to a counterclaim claim (including a principal and preliminary claim).

2. The reasons why the court should explain this part of this part of the basic facts are as follows: the part of the “instant commercial building” in Chapter 7 of the 3th page 7 is 131.5 square meters per floor among the real estate indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant commercial building”).

) Except as otherwise expressly provided for in the Civil Procedure Act, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, which is 1. Basic Facts, and thus quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the same Procedure.

3. Determination on a counterclaim

A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1) The reasoning of this part is as follows: (a) since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (b) the part No. 6, No. 7, and No. 7, No. 420 among the grounds of the judgment, the Defendant’s claim for damages equivalent to KRW 92,00,000 for the premium paid by the Defendant upon acquiring the right to the commercial building of this case is not accepted; (c) if the Defendant received KRW 4,000,000 from the Defendant and did not implement the lease contract under the same condition as that of the new lessee in the event the Defendant transferred the right to the commercial building of this case, the Plaintiff did not obtain KRW 70,000 (or KRW 60,000,000,000 for the premium that the Defendant would have received from the new lessee E; and (d) as a preliminary default, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Defendant the above obligation to pay KRW 70,000,00.