1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendants are co-owners of the buildings listed in the attached list, and the Plaintiff leased the first floor shop (hereinafter “instant store”) from the Defendants and operated the H convenience store.

B. On May 4, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendants regarding the instant store (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the period from June 7, 2011 to June 16, 2013, on the condition that the lease deposit amount is KRW 65 million, monthly rent is KRW 3.5 million, and the lease period is from June 7, 2011 to June 16, 2013.

C. The instant lease agreement has been explicitly renewed since then. On March 11, 2016, the Defendants sent to the Plaintiff a certificate stating that the Plaintiff had no intent to renew the instant lease agreement after June 16, 2016, which was the expiration date of the lease agreement. Accordingly, the agreement reached around that time.

On May 16, 2016, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendants to renew the instant lease agreement. On the other hand, when the Defendants refused it, the Plaintiff sent a certificate of the content that the Defendants would be able to enter into a lease agreement with the new lessee, as it is planned to recruit new lessee to collect premium, so that the Plaintiff can enter into a lease agreement with the new lessee arranged by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff reached that time.

E. Upon the Defendants’ refusal to renew the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff concluded a premium agreement with I, who wishes to be a new lessee on June 3, 2016, stating that the Plaintiff arranged the instant store and concluded a premium agreement with the Plaintiff as KRW 50 million so that I may rent the instant store.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff arranged an interview with the new lessee to the defendants, and requested a new lease contract, but the defendant demanded 5 million won which is considerably higher than the previous rent of 3.5 million won under the lease contract of this case and refused to enter into a lease contract with the new lessee.