The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

Basic Facts

The reasons stated in this part are as follows, since the reasoning of the court of first instance is the same as that of the corresponding part of the reasoning of the court of first instance except for the parts written by the court below.

The third line is the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant apartment”) of the instant apartment (hereinafter referred to as “instant apartment”).

The third third, the 6th, the 7th, the 9th, the 4th, the 6th, and the 6th “Defendant B” shall be applied to “Defendant B of the first instance trial.”

The 3th, the 7th, the 8th, the 4th, and the 6th, "Defendant Company" shall be charged with "Defendant".

6. The term "the defendant" in the fourth seven lines shall be read as "the defendant and the defendant B of the first instance."

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant lease agreement is a lease agreement that does not set the term or set the term of the contract as one year.

Since the Plaintiff, the transferee of the instant loan claim, terminated the instant lease contract by subrogation, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the amount calculated by subtracting all the amount of the claim, such as the overdue rent, management fee, etc., owned by the Defendant against the Defendant B from the Defendant B of the first instance trial to the time of delivery of the said apartment contract, at the same time, from the deposit deposit 149.6 million won to the Plaintiff.

B. On the other hand, the Plaintiff asserts that the instant lease contract can be terminated at any time, on the ground that the Defendant B of the first instance court is acting in subrogation on the premise that the instant lease contract can be terminated at any time, since the instant lease contract is not set at the time of the second instance court’s date of pleading or set at a one-year period. As such, first, we examine whether the Defendant B of the first instance court can terminate the instant lease contract.

Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by Gap evidence No. 3 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the instant lease agreement between the defendant and the defendant No. 1st instance court.