1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except where the plaintiff added the following additional judgments as to the allegations emphasized by the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant owned assets in excess of the asset holding standard in the instant apartment that is a national rental housing unit, and violated Article 1 of the Standard Contract Terms and Conditions. As such, it constitutes a violation of the obligations under the Standard Terms and Conditions of Contract under Article 10(1)8 of the Standard Terms and Conditions of Contract. The Plaintiff may terminate the instant lease on this ground. The Plaintiff may terminate the instant lease on this ground. (2) As long as the Plaintiff’s declaration of refusal to renew was not withdrawn on January 29, 2013 and August 29, 2013, the notification of refusal to renew is still deemed to exist. Accordingly, the instant lease was terminated on January 31, 2015.

B. The lessee can renew the lease contract on a two-year basis with the lessee who maintains the qualification for occupancy of national rental housing (such as the qualification for occupancy of a house without house, ownership of assets, income, and requirements for restricting the scale of a house on a single-household basis) as a special condition of the instant lease contract, whether there exists a ground for termination under Article 10(1) Subparagraph 8 of the General Conditions of the contract

The fact that the contents of Paragraph 1.. are included are as recognized by the judgment of the court of first instance. However, the asset holding standard under the above provision is interpreted as a matter of "qualification for occupancy" of the apartment of this case, and the maintenance of the asset holding standard cannot be deemed as a lessee's duty related to the lease of this case. Thus, in case where the lessee fails to meet the asset ownership standard, it shall be viewed as a ground for refusing to renew the lease of the lessor pursuant to Paragraph 1 of the above special condition of the contract, separate from whether it can be a ground for refusing