1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On July 29, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on KRW 40 million, monthly rent of KRW 220,000,000, and July 31, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the non-dong 104 (hereinafter “instant store”). On July 29, 2013, the Plaintiff was operating the instant store with D’s mutual restaurant.

B. Under the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a special agreement that the Defendant did not participate in the Plaintiff’s premium but does not refuse to lease to the new lessee (hereinafter “instant special agreement”).

C. On March 2016, the Plaintiff agreed to terminate the instant lease agreement and requested Franchising the lease of the instant store and the transfer of goodwill to Franchising the E Licensed Real Estate Agent Office to recover the premium of the instant store.

On May 12, 2016, the Defendant divided the instant store and leased 29 square meters, part of the instant store, to H, a new lessee, as a broker operating the G Licensed Real Estate Agent Office, on May 12, 2016, and leased the remainder to H on June 30, 2016.

E. On May 19, 2016, the Plaintiff handed over the instant store to the Defendant, and received KRW 13.5 million from I on May 24, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 9, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) requested F to arrange for a new lessee for the transfer of the instant store’s goodwill, and the Defendant and H had the authority to arrange for a new lessee in relation to the instant store, and obstructed F’s affairs to arrange for a new lessee, thereby hindering F’s affairs to arrange for a new lessee. 2) Furthermore, the Defendant leased the instant store in two installments, thereby allowing the Plaintiff to recover KRW 60 million, the premium price for the instant store.

3. The defendant is as above.