The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff).

According to the records, since it is clear that the plaintiff made a pleading against the defendant's counterclaim without raising an objection against it at the first instance trial (refer to Chapter 84 of the record), the plaintiff shall be deemed to waive his right to ask questions as to the legitimacy of the counterclaim (refer to Chapter 84 of the record). However, the court below's dismissal of the defendant's appeal on the ground that the counterclaim of this case was unlawful and dismissed on the ground that it was justified by the court of first instance, but even if based on the records, it did not show that the defendant has the right to claim the reduction of the rent at the time of the original statement in the counterclaim of this case. Thus, the counterclaim of this case is without merit, and the defendant's counterclaim of this case should be dismissed, and the defendant's counterclaim of this case is more favorable to the defendant, and the defendant's counterclaim of this case's counterclaim of this case should be dismissed, and therefore the plaintiff'

The grounds of appeal No. 2 are examined.

However, according to the records and the reasoning of the original judgment, the plaintiff's lease of state-owned real estate in this case to the defendant shall be the one year period, the time period shall expire, and the lease contract shall be renewed at that time in 1964 and 1965, and the contract shall be renewed at that time, and the defendant shall comply with the terms and conditions of the lease in accordance with the plaintiff's submission to the plaintiff. Thus, even if the rent in this case is higher than the rent in 1963 as in the argument, the defendant shall not be deemed to be entitled to pay the rent in 1963. Article 5 of the written permission for use only provides that the plaintiff shall be notified at least two months prior to the time of increase or decrease of the determined rent during the lease period, and it shall not be viewed that the previous lease contract is terminated, and that the terms and conditions of the lease contract shall not be applied to the renewal of the lease contract by the defendant's request for renewal of the lease contract, and it shall not be viewed that there is no obstacle to the plaintiff's submission of the above evidence.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed without merit. The costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Judges Cho Man Jung (Presiding Judge) Kim Gi-bunk Kim