1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) are jointly owned by the Plaintiff, C, and C, as 3/10 shares, D, and E, respectively, 2/10 shares.

B. On August 25, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the term of lease from September 17, 2015 to December 30, 2015, the lease deposit amount of KRW 500,000,000 per annum and KRW 3,200,000,000 for the Plaintiff’s lease to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. The instant lease agreement was renewed by December 31, 2016.

[In the absence of any dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion on the cause of the claim has expressed his/her intent to refuse to renew the lease agreement to the Defendant on or around November 2016, as the term of the instant lease agreement expires, and the instant lease agreement terminated upon the expiration of the term.

The Defendant did not request the Plaintiff to renew the contract one month prior to the expiration of the instant lease agreement.

The building of this case was used for about 50 years with a building permit issued on September 13, 1967, and the building of this case fell from the ceiling, and the building of this case was worn out, such as fluencies and concrete fluencies.

Therefore, even if the defendant demanded renewal, the defendant demanded renewal.

Article 10 (1) 7B of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act.

In accordance with the following items, reconstruction is necessary as "cases where there is a risk of safety accidents, such as deterioration, damage, or partial destruction of a building," and therefore, the plaintiff does not have a duty to comply with the defendant's

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff.

3. In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in the statement Nos. 2 through 6 of the judgment, the Plaintiff was found to the Defendant around November 2016 and notified the Defendant of the refusal to renew the instant lease agreement, and the Defendant is existing.