1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

A. Of the underground floor of the building indicated in the attached list 286.88 square meters, 202.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 16, 2009, the Plaintiff purchased a building listed in the separate sheet from C on April 16, 2009, and purchased the same month.

4.27. Completion of the registration of ownership transfer.

B. Before the above sale, the Defendant: (a) leased the instant singing room with deposit money of KRW 20 million and KRW 750,000 per month and operated a singing room; (b) the Plaintiff succeeded to the status of the lessor from C in consultation with the original Defendant and C on April 30, 2009; (c) according to the agreement between the original Defendant and C, the term of lease was extended to May 21, 2010; and (d) the date of rent payment was set as the 30th day of each month by the agreement between the original Defendant and the Defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant lease contract”) succeeded to the original Defendant.

The instant lease agreement continues to run singing business even after the maturity date, and it was implicitly renewed by the Plaintiff due to its failure to raise an objection.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s judgment on the India’s claim is the fact that the Defendant received the rent from May 1, 2009, among the rent from May 1, 2009, which was the day following the date of succession to a lessor’s status, from July 1, 2010. Therefore, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Plaintiff paid the rent from August 2010 to that of the Defendant. There is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Meanwhile, in full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 4, around November 30, 2012, the plaintiff sent to the defendant a document evidencing the contents of the agreement that the lease contract of this case is terminated, and at that time the above mail was served on the defendant. Thus, the plaintiff's failure to pay rent for more than two years at the time of sending the above mail.