1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following order for payment shall be revoked, and above.

1. In the first instance court’s trial scope, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for reimbursement of KRW 2,00 from June 1, 2016 to October 30, 2016 (2,00,000), from September 1, 2017 to November 30, 2017 (3,630,000), from September 1, 2017, and from November 30, 2017, for reimbursement of KRW 21,317,50, and each claim for reimbursement was dismissed.

The appeal was filed against the part of the claim for restoration expenses against the defendant, and the plaintiff did not file an appeal, so only the part of the claim for restoration expenses is subject to the judgment of this court.

2. Basic facts

A. On December 1, 2016, the Plaintiff leased C/ 506 square meters of land for a factory and building on ground (hereinafter “instant factory”) to the Defendant on a deposit basis for lease KRW 2,000,000, monthly rent KRW 1,100,000, and the lease period from December 1, 2016 to May 30, 2017.

(hereinafter “instant lease”). At the time, the Defendant agreed to restore the said real estate to its original state and return it to the Plaintiff when the said lease contract is terminated.

B. The Defendant was engaged in the manufacture and sales business of the Acryle lighting fixtures, etc. with the trade name “E” at its own place of business (D) adjacent to the instant factory.

The same year as of April 21, 2017 at the above workplace on two occasions.

6. 17.17. Fire occurred. Accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered damage, such as loss of, damage to, and damage to the area adjacent to the above factory. C. The Defendant delivered the instant factory to the Plaintiff on July 2017 without having been reinstated to the original state. [Grounds for recognition] The Defendant did not dispute, and the facts that there is no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, 5, 8 through 10, Eul No. 1, and Eul No. 1 (with a serial number, each entry or video, including a variety number, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

3. The plaintiff's assertion that the factory of this case is damaged due to the above fire and the installation of drainage pipes by the defendant's unauthorized permission. The cost of restoring to its original state the total of KRW 21,317,500 for the fence construction cost of KRW 13,267,500 + KRW 300,000 for the toilet water construction + KRW 3,100,000 for the sewerage pipeline construction cost of KRW 3,100.