1. The defendant shall deliver real estate stated in the attached list from the plaintiff to the plaintiff at the same time, and at the same time, KRW 20,000,000 to the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 30, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) determined that the premium for the said store was KRW 120 million to C, the lessee of the real estate listed in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant store”); and (b) paid the premium to C, the lessee of the said store.

B. On September 30, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded each lease contract with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.3 million, and the lease period from September 30, 2014 to September 29, 2017 (36 months) with regard to the instant store.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Paragraph (1) of the said lease agreement provides that “The lessee is unable to transfer to a third party without the lessor’s consent, and all of the facility costs and premiums cannot be recognized, and the lessor cannot file a claim against the lessor.”

C. Around that time, the Plaintiff received delivery of the instant store, and operated a sing point at the said store.

On January 4, 2017, the Defendant: (a) intended to remove and reconstruct the instant store on the grounds of risk of safety accidents, such as aging, damage, and partial destruction; (b) thus, there is no intent to renew the instant lease; and (c) upon entering into the instant lease agreement, the lessee agreed not to claim for the premium to the lessor, and thus, cannot reduce the premium; and (d) notified the Plaintiff of the purport of changing the delivery of the instant store after the expiration of the lease agreement.

E. On April 6, 2017, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to renew the instant lease agreement. On the other hand, when the instant lease agreement is terminated, the Plaintiff gave a large amount of the premium to the lessee before the conclusion of the instant lease agreement and took over the instant store since the Plaintiff failed to be notified of the rebuilding plan of the instant store at the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement. Therefore, the Plaintiff sent a certificate of content that the Plaintiff would hinder the Plaintiff from collecting the premium by acting on behalf of the new lessee.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and .