1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 19, 2010, the Plaintiff leased part of the fourth floor of the store located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant store”) (hereinafter “instant store”) from the Defendant for the lease deposit of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,800,000, and from November 19, 201 to May 31, 201, the lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000 was paid to the Defendant around that time.

B. After the expiration of May 31, 201, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with the following terms: (a) to increase the rent to KRW 3,00,000 per month from September 30, 201; and (b) to September 29, 201, with the term of lease from September 30, 201 to September 201.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant lease contract”) concluded around November 19, 201 is the first lease contract and the second lease contract concluded around September 30, 201, and all of them are referred to as the “instant lease contract.”

After the conclusion of the first lease contract, the original and the Defendant prepared a "bundance contract" with the name of KRW 650,000 per month, and the Defendant submitted the said contract to the Namcheon Tax Office, and reported that it is the tea of the instant lease contract to KRW 650,000, and paid the value-added tax corresponding thereto.

On the other hand, around February 2012, the Plaintiff is the Defendant’s 401 heading 401 below the Defendant’s ownership among the instant commercial buildings from the Defendant.

A further lease of B, operated a car page from March 2012 to May 2012, 2012, but the said lease was terminated on May 2012, and the Defendant thereafter operated a car page from June 2012 to May 2013.

E. On April 5, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 883,840 for charges for causing traffic congestion in 2011, which was imposed on the instant store, etc.

F. On August 21, 2013, before the expiration of the instant lease term, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to renew the instant lease contract, but the Defendant, on August 29, 2013, requested the Plaintiff to renew the instant lease contract.