1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 28, 2014, the Plaintiff leased a store of 48.4 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant store”) in the D Hospital located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, by setting the deposit amount of KRW 950,00,000, and the period from March 1, 2014 to February 28, 2016, respectively.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant lease agreement”). (b)

On February 18, 2016, the Defendant offered a bid to determine a new lessee of the instant store, and the Gasteteday Co., Ltd. was awarded a new lessee.

C. On February 28, 2016, the Plaintiff concluded a premium contract with the content that the Plaintiff transferred the lessee status of the instant store to E in KRW 81,000,000 for premiums.

On March 21, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to conclude a new lease agreement on the instant stores with E, and if the Plaintiff refuses the said request, the Plaintiff sent a certificate to the effect that he/she would claim compensation for damages incurred by interfering with the Plaintiff’s opportunity to recover the premium on the instant stores, and thereafter, the said certificate of content reaches the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, 2, 3, 4-1, Eul evidence 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. On February 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant asserted that the term of the instant lease agreement was extended on March 28, 2016 (the Plaintiff asserted that the term of the instant lease agreement was extended from the original complaint to the last day of March 28, 2016; however, on July 15, 2016, the Plaintiff agreed that the term of the instant lease agreement was extended by March 28, 2016. Since each of the above documents was stated at the first date for pleading, the former assertion is deemed to have been withdrawn by the latter’s assertion). Accordingly, on March 21, 2016, the Plaintiff agreed that the Defendant would extend the term of the instant lease agreement to the Defendant on March 21, 2016.

It is necessary to conclude a lease contract with E, a new lessee arranged by the plaintiff, such as the statement in the port.