1. The plaintiff's appeal against the main claim is dismissed.

2.(a)

The plaintiff's ancillary.

1. The court's explanation of this part of the basic facts is the same as the pertinent part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, citing it as it is by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. This Court’s reasoning concerning the primary claim is as follows: (a) it is identical to the entry of the third to fifth to fourth to fourth to fourth of the reasons for the first instance judgment, except where the third to sixth “Witness G” of the third to the third to the first to the witness G of the first to the court; and (b) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Determination on the conjunctive claim

A. Whether a right to demand an increase in rent is recognized or not) If the rent is unreasonable due to the increase or decrease in the public burden on the leased object or any other change in the economic situation, the lessee may demand an increase or decrease in rent for the future (Article 628 of the Civil Act). The rent determined by the court as it did not reach an agreement between the parties when a lessor requests an increase in rent for the future pursuant to Article 628 of the Civil Act takes effect retroactively at the time when he/she expresses his/her intent to demand an increase in rent, barring any special circumstance, shall be deemed the due date when he/she reaches the other party, not at the court’s market price, but at 015Da239508, 23908, 239515, etc.). In light of the foregoing legal principles, the rent for the increased rent shall be deemed to have been 100 million won or more, 200 million won or more, 300 million won or more, 200 million won or more, 340504 square meters or more, respectively.