Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

On July 15, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between the Defendant and Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, and the first floor H (hereinafter “instant store”) with a deposit of KRW 100 million, monthly rent of KRW 3200,000,000, and period of lease from July 21, 2012 to February 20, 2015, and operated the instant real estate by delivery.

After that, on December 18, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract to change the term of the above lease from February 21, 2015 to February 20, 2018. On December 20, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract to change the term of the lease from February 21, 2018 to February 20, 2019.

(2) On November 20, 2018, the Plaintiff expressed to the Defendant the intent to terminate the contract on February 20, 2019 without renewal of the instant lease agreement, and the Defendant also accepted the instant lease agreement.

On February 22, 2019, the date of the termination of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with D, setting a deposit of KRW 100 million, monthly rent of KRW 3.8 million, term of lease from March 18, 2019 to March 17, 2023.

[Ground of Recognition: The plaintiff's assertion that "the plaintiff arranged a new tenant, and the defendant refused a lease contract with a new tenant and obstructed the collection of the plaintiff's premium." The plaintiff's assertion that "the plaintiff rejected a lease contract with a new tenant and interfered with the collection of the plaintiff's premium."

The defendant accepted the high-amount deposit and monthly rent terms for the store of this case, and obstructed the conclusion of premium contracts between the plaintiff and the new lessee in a non-cooperative manner, such as not being a new lessee or a new lessee suitable for such terms and conditions, which is substantial.