1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant, including those resulting from the supplementary participation.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the addition of the following determination as to the allegations added by the defendant to this court, even if the defendant bears the testimony of Eul-B and Eul-B (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) additionally submitted to this court, and witness E of the court of first instance, such testimony is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The defendant's argument as to the defendant's argument that he sub-leases the land of this case from E, the defendant asserts that the defendant has the right to possess the land of this case since he concluded a sub-lease contract on February 26, 2015 with E which leased the land of this case from the plaintiff on February 26, 2015.

Under the relevant legal doctrine, a lessee is entitled to terminate a lease agreement if he/she fails to transfer his/her right or sub-leases the leased object without the consent of the lessor and the lessee violates it (see Article 629 of the Civil Act). However, considering the continuous legal relationship based on the personal trust of the original party, it is intended to protect the lessor’s personal trust or economic interest and not to cause any harm to it. The lessee’s use of and profit from the leased object to a third party without the consent of the lessor can be an act of good faith that makes it difficult for the lessor to continue the lease relationship. Therefore, it is intended to allow the lessor to terminate the lease agreement unilaterally.

Therefore, even if a lessee allows a third party to use or benefit from the leased object without a separate consent from the lessor, in special circumstances where the lessee’s act cannot be deemed as an act of worship against the lessor, the lessor will sublease the leased object without his/her consent.