1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff is the owner and lessor of the real estate stated in the purport of the claim. The Defendant, around November 16, 2012, leased the said real estate from the Plaintiff on a deposit of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 800,000 (payment date: until December 9, 2014), and the lease period of KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 800,000 (payment date: the payment date until December 9, 2014) and possessed the said real estate up to the present time, may not be disputed between the parties, or may be recognized by the statements in the evidence A1 and 2.

Therefore, the Plaintiff asserts that the above lease was terminated due to the delay in the payment of the rent for three or more three or more occasions of the Defendant (the date of each payment shall be September, 2013, October, July, 2014, and August), and that due to the termination, the Plaintiff sought reimbursement of KRW 30 million for the delivery of the above real estate and restitution of the said property to the Defendant. However, it is difficult to view that there was any overdue payment equivalent to the termination of the contract in light of the purport of the statement in the evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings, and no other reason exists for the termination of the lease relationship possible with the lessor’s unilateral intent.

(O) According to the statement in Eul evidence 2, the defendant, within the time limit stipulated in Article 10 (1) of the above Act, requested the plaintiff to renew the above lease. Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion that is based on the premise of the termination of the lease is not acceptable, aside from the exercise of the right to claim an increase or decrease in the rent as stipulated in the above Act.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.