1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 10, 2014, the Plaintiff, from the Defendant, set the lease deposit of KRW 10 million, KRW 500,000,000 monthly rent, from November 10, 2014 to November 10, 2015, the lease term of KRW 102,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00

B. During the lease period, the Plaintiff installed the glass entrance, new Si, waterworks, and electric facilities necessary for the use of the instant store.

C. Upon the termination of the instant lease, the Defendant was handed over the instant store on January 5, 2016 upon the decision to take a provisional disposition for delivery on December 24, 2015.

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

2. Grounds for and determination of the claim

A. During the lease term of this case, the Plaintiff attached the glass entrance, new city, waterworks, electric facilities, etc. with the consent of the Defendant. Since the above facilities increased the objective convenience of the store of this case, the Defendant is obligated to pay a considerable amount of the purchase price of the attached facilities according to the Plaintiff’s exercise of the right to purchase the attached facilities.

B. According to Article 646 of the Civil Act, in order for the lessee to exercise the right to purchase the appurtenances, the requirements for the accessories attached to the leased object with the consent of the lessor or purchased from the lessor are met.

At this time, the lessor's consent to the installation of accessories can be given implied consent.

(See Supreme Court Decision 95Da12927 delivered on June 30, 1995). We examine the following: (a) there is insufficient evidence to deem that the facilities asserted by the Plaintiff bring objective convenience to the use of the store of this case, not for the lessee’s special purpose, but for the use of the building lessee’s store of this case; and (b) it is not a part

In addition, there is no evidence to prove that the defendant consented to the installation of the above facilities claimed by the plaintiff.

Rather, A.