The plaintiff's appeal and the claims added by this court are all dismissed.

costs of lawsuit after an appeal are filed.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited this case is to be deleted, replaced, or added as follows. Paragraph (2) requires that the plaintiff’s assertion repeatedly emphasizes and that this court’s decision on additional claims should be added. As such, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, the reasoning of the judgment of the court

The deletion part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be replaced by the 12th parallel between the 5th parallel of the judgment of the court of first instance and the 10th parallel of the 6th parallel of the 10th parallel of the 6th parallel of the judgment of first instance, and the 5th parallel of the 7th parallel of the judgment of first instance to the 10th parallel of the 5th parallel of the 5th parallel of the 5th parallel of the 4th parallel of the 10th parallel of the 10th parallel of the

According to the evidence evidence Nos. 32, 33, and 42 of A, the Defendants notified the Plaintiff of the increase of rent of KRW 1,250,00 (excluding value-added tax) on January 23, 2017, and they may claim for a total of KRW 22,275,00 (including KRW 20,075,000 for monthly rent of KRW 20,200 for KRW D (including monthly rent of KRW 20,00,00 for KRW 2,20,00 for KRW 10,00 for KRW 20,00 for KRW 20,00 for KRW 20,00 for KRW 20,00 for KRW 23,375,00 for KRW 175,00 for KRW 20 for each month from January 2018, the Defendants additionally claimed for rent of KRW 20,00 for KRW 271,20 for KRW 71,200 for the following year.

“The 13th day of the judgment of the first instance [10%]” is as follows. From January 2018, the rent from January 2018 includes KRW 23,375,00 per month (the calculation method is equivalent to that from December 2016, and the detailed contents are omitted).

2. Additional determination by this Court

A. Whether the increase in the rent of this case is null and void due to the agreement between the parties, the Plaintiff unilaterally increases the rent in violation of Article 628 of the Civil Act, which is a mandatory provision, and thus, is null and void.