1. Defendant Love Investment Co., Ltd. pays KRW 300,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

2. The lawsuit of this case is pending.

1. On November 10, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant Rome Investment on a set of KRW 300 million, monthly rent of KRW 15 million, and the lease agreement between November 14, 2013 and 24 months (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with regard to the instant real estate, and around that time, the Plaintiff paid KRW 300 million to Defendant Rome Investment. On November 13, 2015, the instant lease agreement was terminated as of November 13, 2015, and it is deemed that Defendant Rome Investment led to a confession pursuant to Article 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

Therefore, Defendant Loma Entertainment is obligated to return the above lease deposit amount to the Plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

However, the Plaintiff claimed for late payment from November 14, 2015, the day following the expiration date of the instant lease agreement. However, the Plaintiff’s obligation to return the lease deposit of Defendant Rome Entertainment under the instant lease agreement is in the simultaneous performance relationship with the Plaintiff’s obligation to return the leased property, and barring special circumstances, such as the Plaintiff’s repayment of the instant real property to Defendant Rome Entertainment, it cannot be deemed that the obligation to return the lease deposit of Defendant Rome Entertainment was delayed performance. The Plaintiff’s assertion itself continues to possess the instant real property even after the termination date of the instant lease agreement, and thus, the Plaintiff cannot be held liable for delay of the said obligation to return the lease deposit, and the Plaintiff’s right to claim for late payment is not reasonable.

Ultimately, Defendant Loma Entertainment is obligated to return the above lease deposit to the Plaintiff. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Loma Entertainment is justified within the scope of the above recognition.

2. The part concerning the claim for confirmation of lien among the instant lawsuit is lawful.