The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed in entirety.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Basic Facts

A. On September 6, 2005, the Plaintiff leased from the Defendants the Gangnam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City D, E (hereinafter “instant site”) and its ground buildings with a deposit of KRW 400 million, monthly rent of KRW 15 million, and the period from September 6, 2005 to September 5, 2012 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The instant lease agreement includes the following special terms and conditions.

Matters of special agreement

2. Mediation every two years after five years from the date of the contract according to the inflation rate.

7. The lessee may repair the building in accordance with the lessee’s business purpose, but all of the responsibilities and expenses incurred in the reconstruction and repair of the building are borne by the lessee. 8. The lessee is not entitled to all of the expenses incurred in the reconstruction and repair of the building in the event that the lessee leaves the building due to the removal following the termination of the contract period and the reasons for the removal and termination of the contract due to the lessee’s circumstances.

9. The lessee may not claim against the lessor any premium and beneficial cost arising from the business of the given real estate.

On October 2005, the Plaintiff removed the existing building owned by the Defendants on the instant site, and newly constructed the instant building in the name of the Defendants.

The building of this case was completed on March 14, 2006, and on May 22, 2006, registration of preservation of ownership was completed in the future of the Defendants.

C. On August 2, 2012, the Defendants notified the Plaintiff that the instant lease agreement was terminated on the ground that the Plaintiff did not comply with a request for the adjustment of rent under Article 2 of the Terms and Conditions of the instant lease agreement, and thereafter filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff as Seoul Central District Court 2013Gahap80653, which sought delivery, etc. of the instant building. In the said lawsuit, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant building was newly constructed and originally acquired by the Plaintiff.

On September 4, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendants are as follows during the said lawsuit.