Among the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid under the order shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 1, 2018, the Plaintiff leased the entire building on the 100 million won of the lease deposit (a contract deposit of KRW 30 million on the date of the contract, the intermediate payment of KRW 20 million on November 2, 2018, the remainder of KRW 50 million on March 1, 2019), the monthly rent of KRW 9 million, the contract period from November 2, 2018 to November 1, 2013) from the Defendant.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

On the date of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff entered into an investment contract with C on behalf of the Defendant’s husband to conclude the said lease agreement, and with respect to the business promoted by the Plaintiff in relation to the instant lease agreement, C, not later than December 28, 2018, with a view to investing KRW 150 million,000,000.

C. On November 20, 2018, the Plaintiff drafted a letter of undertaking (hereinafter “instant letter of undertaking”) with C representing the Defendant, as follows:

Note - Advance payment of KRW 50 million from 100,000 for the initial deposit - The remainder deposit of KRW 50,000 shall be paid by the Plaintiff until June 2, 2019.

- Transfer or acquisition of a business license certificate shall be made until December 3, 2018 and shall be returned to the first 50 million won of the deposit at the time it was not made smooth.

(Period until December 5, 2018) - C provides the Plaintiff with a loan of KRW 70 million up to January 30, 2019, on condition of interest on a monthly basis, and lending KRW 80 million up to March 30, 2019, subject to interest on a monthly basis.

The Plaintiff shall return the loan by March 30, 2022.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff still remains the lease contract period of E (C's female life), which is the existing lessee of the above building, and the report on the business of E remains in the name of E. In addition, due to disputes over the conclusion of the instant lease contract with V, who is the father of C, and the execution of the instant lease contract is normally difficult, the Plaintiff and the instant case.