1. Of the part concerning the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance, the money that orders payment below is equivalent to the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

The court's explanation of this case in this case is set forth in Article 3-B of the judgment of the first instance.

The part concerning a claim shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment, except for the following modifications:

[Attachment of the part used] The defendant's assertion that each of the above payments in this case was extinguished by the plaintiff's claim in order of the principal of lease deposit, the balance of lease deposit, the late payment damages for 270,000,000 won and the payment demand expenses. Thus, if the debtor bears several obligations for the same kind to the same creditor, and the payment of performance is not extinguished by the whole amount, the person who performs the obligation can designate one of the obligations at the time and appropriate it for the repayment (Article 476 (1) of the Civil Act), but in the case of appropriation of performance to the principal, Article 479 of the Civil Act shall not apply mutatis mutandis, and Article 476 of the Civil Act as to the payment of the principal and interest, the amount of the principal and interest shall be appropriated in order of expenses, interest, and the other party's payment of the principal, and the order of 100,000 won which the plaintiff paid to the plaintiff shall be appropriated unilaterally in 19,601,201.