1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall be attached to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. The basic facts of the claim (1) are the owner of the building, one unit of the four-story aggregate building in the king City F, the Defendant, and the neighboring land (hereinafter referred to as “Jho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-si, G 495 square meters, H 839 square meters, and I 59 square meters or less before division). Each of the above lands was divided into several lots as below the cadastral map around December 2015, and some of them were transferred by consultation on public land, and the Plaintiffs are the lessees of the first floor Jho-ho (hereinafter referred to as “Jho-ho-ho-ho

In the cadastral map after the land division, FH G G I K L N Pu Q R S (2) building consists of the second-class neighborhood living facilities of the first floor (general restaurants, first-class neighborhood living facilities, but the defendant changed to the second-class neighborhood living facilities while leasing to the plaintiffs), second-class neighborhood living facilities of the second floor, third-story urban living housing (studio, 9 households), and fourth multi-household housing (1 household), and the defendant resides in the fourth floor of the building of the second floor of the building of the E.

(3) On March 7, 2013, the Plaintiffs (not submitted any data that could identify their relations) concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit of KRW 50 million from the Defendant for the purpose of operating a restaurant, KRW 2750,000 (including value-added tax: 18th of each month), the lease term of KRW 180,000 per month, and from March 18, 2013 (from March 5, 2013 at the beginning of the first year, however, the Plaintiffs’ restaurant opening date was changed to March 18, 2013), and entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

At the time of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant used the instant building as a restaurant parking lot by the Plaintiffs and the tenants, including the Plaintiffs, before and after the instant lease agreement. The lessor, if a dispute arises between the Plaintiffs and the tenants including the Plaintiffs due to the use of the parking lot, is the lessor, who is the lessor.