1. The defendant

A. Of the 191.94 square meters of the building on the 1st floor listed in the attached Table list, each of the attached drawings indicated in the 8, 7, 6, 9, 8.

Basic Facts

On October 20, 2013, the Plaintiff is the owner of the building indicated in the attached list. On October 20, 2013, the Defendant: (a) set the lease deposit deposit amount of KRW 5,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 350,000 (on October 20, 2013) on the part (A) of the part (hereinafter referred to as “instant store”) in the attached sheet of KRW 8,7,6,9,8, among the 191.94 square meters of the 1st floor; and (b) on October 19, 2015 from October 20, 2013 to October 19, 2015.

From March 20, 2015, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant, on September 14, 2015, a content-certified mail demanding the termination of the lease agreement and the delivery of the instant store, and reached the Defendant on the following day.

[Grounds for recognition] According to the facts stated in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and in accordance with the overall purport of the arguments, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to deliver the store of this case to the plaintiff, barring any special circumstance. The defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the money calculated at the rate of KRW 3,150,000 per month (= KRW 350,000 x 9 months x 350 months) and the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 350,00 per month from March 20, 2015 to November 19, 2015 from November 20, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the store of this case.

The Defendant’s assertion regarding the Defendant’s assertion that: (a) the lessee of the instant store did not report the closure of business; and (b) the Plaintiff did not perform funeral services for several months, which led to the Plaintiff’s failure to file a report on the relocation of business registration; and (c) the Plaintiff promised to allow the use of toilets outside the store due to narrow, etc.; (d) the Plaintiff did not engage in funeral services for a period of one year as it did not cause the Plaintiff to use the toilets outside the store; and (e) the instant store repair cost of KRW 10,000,000 was 10,000,000, and thus, the Defendant did not have a duty to pay monthly rent from October 20, 2014; (e) however, the Plaintiff’s each statement in subparagraphs 7 and 1 through 6 was insufficient to acknowledge it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant.