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 March 11, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the lease deposit for approximately 18 square meters (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) among the first floor of the Seoul Northern-gu C and D ground buildings owned by the Defendant, setting the lease deposit for KRW 40 million, KRW 140 million per month in rent (including value-added tax), and the lease term for the lease from March 27, 2015 to March 27, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). After paying the lease deposit to the Defendant, the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant commercial building by delivery from the Defendant.

B. The Plaintiff paid only six-month rent out of the rent under the instant lease agreement, and did not pay the remainder of the rent and management fee for the remaining 18 months. The instant lease agreement terminated on March 27, 2017. On April 10, 2017, the Defendant returned the remainder of the lease deposit after deducting the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 2,612,00,000,000, such as the rent and management fee, etc. in arrears from the lease deposit, and received the delivery from the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff could no longer operate the instant commercial building at the monthly rent for more than six months after the lease of the commercial building, and the Plaintiff sought a new lessee to request the Defendant to change the lessee, but the Defendant refused to do so.

At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff installed a water supply and drainage facility with the construction cost of KRW 2 million in the instant commercial building. At the time of the conclusion of the lease agreement, the Plaintiff paid the lessee the premium of KRW 10 million and acquired the facilities, etc. of the instant commercial building. The Plaintiff’s agent and the Defendant’s agent and the Plaintiff’s agent refused the Plaintiff’s request for the change of the lessee, and did not change the lessee by hindering the conclusion

Therefore, the defendant is against the plaintiff.