1. The plaintiff's appeal and the supplementary selective claims in the trial are dismissed, respectively.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added the following "2. Additional determination" to the argument that the plaintiff had selected an alternative in the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be accepted by the main sentence of Article 420

2. Additional determination

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant divided C's store into the plaintiff and D in Seopo-si, and sub-leases each of them.

The Plaintiff transferred part of the above stores to KRW 25 million in annual rent, and D transferred to KRW 15 million in annual rent, excluding the portion sub-leased to the Plaintiff among the above stores. The Plaintiff and D divided the same store into two spaces. At the time of concluding the above sub-lease contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed that the size of the store will be pre-divided in installments according to the aforementioned annual rent ratio.

However, the defendant allowed the plaintiff and D to use each part of the above store divided by 1/2.

On November 30, 2015, the Defendant suspended the business because it is difficult to continue the business in a narrow store than the above agreement, and on February 19, 2016, notified the Defendant of the termination of the contract.

At the time of preparing the said sub-lease contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a special agreement that “The rent shall be calculated on the basis of the remaining day when the problem occurs while running the business,” and as long as the Defendant’s business ends due to a cause attributable to the Defendant, the Defendant is obligated to refund the rent from December 1, 2015 to July 24, 2016, which is the day following the Plaintiff’s termination of business, from December 1, 2015 to July 24, 2016, the expiration date of the said sub-lease contract.”

B. According to the statements and images of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number), the defendant, on July 30, 2015, lent part of the above store to the plaintiff from July 30, 2015 to July 24, 2016, with the annual rent of 25 million won.