A. On May 13, 2009, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with B, C (hereinafter referred to as “former owners”) and with regard to the size of 30 square meters in the ship (hereinafter referred to as “instant store”) which connects each point of (a) part of 330 square meters in sequence, among the buildings listed in the attached Table List (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) 592.13 square meters in 1st 5,000,000 won in 24 months from October 5, 2012 to October 5, 2014, and 3.5 million won in monthly rent (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”). The lease agreement was renewed after delivery of the instant store from the former owners, and operated the instant “D restaurant” as “D restaurant after the expiration of the lease period.” The lease agreement was renewed on April 15, 2015.

C. On June 2, 2017, the Plaintiff, who operates the subject of “E”, entered into a contract to purchase the instant building from the former owners to use it for its own place of business, and the former owners of the same month.

7. On October 5, 2017, the Defendant did not want to renew the instant lease agreement, and after which the lease term expires, a written notice to return the instant store to either his or his or his or her successor was sent to the Defendant on the following day.

On June 28, 2017, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant building.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts that there is no dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. Although the transfer of the lessor’s status in a lease agreement to determine the cause of the claim involves the transfer of the lessor’s duty, the lessor’s duty does not vary specifically by whom the lessor is a person, and is almost fully able to perform the duty in the owner’s position of the object, and from the standpoint of the lessee, succession of the duty to the new owner.