1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Facts constituting the basis for no dispute between the parties;

A. A building entered in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) was originally public property D, and the Plaintiff had been transferred on December 11, 2015 the ownership of the instant building and its site to the Defendants en bloc, as shown in the attached Form -- between D and D police officers on March 2012, 202, when it had been leased two floors (16 m2, 168 m2) from D, and the Plaintiff had operated the instant building and its site, from around 202.

B. After that, on January 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Defendants to renew the above lease agreement. However, the Defendants demanded the Plaintiff to deliver all the second floor of the instant building by April 19, 2016, without explicitly accepting the Plaintiff’s request, until February 2016.

2. Determination on both arguments

A. As the cause of the instant claim, the Plaintiff requested for the conclusion of a lease agreement by arranging a new lessee on or around March 22, 2016, which was sought as premium for the said refusal of renewal as above, but the Defendants demanded deposit 150 million won and monthly rent 5.5 million won and the lease agreement was null and void.

At the time, the Defendants would have been able to receive premium of at least 20 million won if they entered into a lease agreement.

In a case where the Defendants, as seen above, committed an act of demanding the Plaintiff to become a new lessee of commercial buildings in light of taxes, public imposts, rents and deposits for surrounding commercial buildings, and other charges, and thereby interfered with the Plaintiff’s collection of premiums, the Defendants are entitled to the premium for the building of this case.