1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 12, 2013, the Defendant purchased five-story buildings, such as neighborhood living facilities, (hereinafter “instant building”) in a voluntary auction procedure.

B. On July 15, 2013, the Plaintiff decided to lease from the Defendant the area of 17 square meters (hereinafter “instant leased area”) in the direction of the south side of the 2nd floor as indicated in the attached Table among the instant building. On the same day, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 10 million as the down payment for the lease contract. On September 4, 2013, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant with the following terms and conditions.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant lease contract”). The portion to be leased: The deposit for a second-story female house or store: KRW 100 million: KRW 500,000 (pre-paid payment shall be made at the time of occupancy after the completion of the interior work).

C. On September 4, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 120 million to the Defendant KRW 100 million, deducting the down payment already paid from the total sum of the facility cost of KRW 30 million. D.

On September 5, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of chonsegwon from September 4, 2013 to September 3, 2018.

E. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on the instant lease agreement around November 20, 2015, and the Plaintiff delivered the instant lease portion to the Defendant around November 25, 2015.

F. On December 8, 2015, the Defendant deposited KRW 100 million of the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement with the Ulsan District Court No. 497, a deposit account for the Plaintiff as the principal.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1-1, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. After the termination of the agreement on the instant lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the new lessee arranged by the Plaintiff, the Defendant obstructed the Plaintiff from collecting the premium by demanding excessive rent or premium. Furthermore, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the new lessee, which did not arrange by the Plaintiff.