1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be found in full view of the overall purport of the arguments and images of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2, Eul evidence No. 3, Eul No. 3, 7, 10, 12, Eul evidence No. 12, and Eul No. 1 or No. 9:

On March 7, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant C on the condition that the lease deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 650,000 (payment in advance on April 11, 201), and the lease term of KRW 36 (five-year lease guarantee) from April 11, 2016 to April 10, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”); and concluded the said lease agreement as a broker of Defendant D.

B. According to the building ledger as to the building of this case, the use of the building of this case is the real estate brokerage office, and its size is 36.9 square meters. At the time of the lease contract of this case, there was a household building (hereinafter “the building of this case”) which was not recorded in the building ledger in the subsequent space of the building of this case, and the plaintiff operated the restaurant upon delivery as well as the building of this case.

C. On February 12, 2019, two months prior to the expiration date of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff filed a claim for refund of deposit for lease and damages equivalent to KRW 54,00,000 if the Plaintiff did not enter into the instant lease agreement if he/she had known of the existence of an illegal building, and issued a certificate of content that he/she would be deemed to consent to the maintenance of the contract under the same conditions as the instant lease agreement.

Accordingly, Defendant C cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s request and the Plaintiff’s monthly rent increase by 5% per year.