1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 40,000,000 and KRW 20,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from October 25, 2019 to January 30, 2020.

1. On October 25, 2019, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 200,00,000, and the lease term of KRW 24 months with respect to D and E (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff paid the down payment of KRW 20,000,000 on the day to the Defendant.

At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the term “the Defendant shall cancel the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security amounting to KRW 244,800,000 at the same time with the payment of the remainder from the Plaintiff” was stated as the special terms and conditions, and the application for cancellation of the execution of the existing provisional attachment was

On December 23, 2019, the Plaintiff confirmed that a provisional attachment (a claim amount of KRW 30,00,00) of the Gyeongnam Credit Guarantee Foundation (a claim amount of KRW 92,473,395) and a provisional attachment (a claim amount of KRW 92,473,395) of the Gyeongnam Credit Guarantee Foundation was attached to the instant real estate, and notified the Defendant of the cancellation of the said provisional attachment on December 24, 2019, and notified the Defendant of the cancellation of the instant lease agreement on the ground that the Defendant did not perform his/her duty under the instant lease agreement on December 31, 2019.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The following circumstances revealed in light of the fact of recognition of Paragraph 1 of the judgment on the cause of the claim, namely, the defendant agreed to cancel the registration of the establishment of the existing right to lease at the same time with the payment of the remainder of the lease deposit from the plaintiff, and specified that the existing provisional seizure was cancelled, and agreed to actively cooperate in the establishment of the right to lease on a deposit basis if the plaintiff requests the establishment of the right to lease on a deposit basis, and if the provisional seizure is completed on the object of the lease agreement, the lessee could not recover the future lease deposit.