1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B indicated in the attached Table 1 list 20.51 square meters, among the real estate 20.51 square meters in the attached Table 1 list.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, on March 5, 2015, donated a building of 22.8 square meters in Mapo-gu Seoul, Mapo-gu and the third story on its ground from D and received the donation from D, for the same month.

6. After completing the registration of ownership transfer, on January 31, 2016, the lease agreement was concluded again between the Defendant B and the lessee of the second floor 201 (hereinafter “instant store”) of the instant building (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with regard to the said store (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) as the lease deposit amount of KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 600,000,000, and the lease term of KRW 24 months from January 31, 2016.

B. Defendant C paid KRW 40 million to F, who is the husband of Defendant B, as a security deposit, and paid KRW 3.5 million each month, and operated clothes at the said store.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, 11, and 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In light of the current use situation of the instant store as seen above and the timing and amount of money that Defendant C paid to Defendant B in relation thereto, it is reasonable to view that Defendant B subleted the said store to Defendant C through F without the Plaintiff’s consent, a lessor.

[Defendant B alleged to the effect that the Plaintiff consented to the sub-lease on the ground of the re-lease consent (Evidence B No. 3) from July 25, 2007, but the above sub-lease consent is the lessor G (owner D) at the time of July 25, 2007, which was seven to eight years before the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the building in which the instant store was located.

(3) On May 25, 2017, the above lease agreement was duly terminated and terminated on May 25, 2017, which was clearly indicated by the Plaintiff’s intent to terminate the lease agreement on the grounds of sub-lease without permission.

As such, Defendant C is obligated to leave the above store and Defendant B is obligated to deliver the above store to the Plaintiff.

3. Defendant B’s assertion against Defendant B is from the Plaintiff.