1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Facts of recognition

A. On March 6, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) one of the co-owners referred to in the E Building F or G, and (b) one of the co-owners of the building F or G, and (c) on or around March 6, 2012, the Plaintiff leased part of his own house to Defendant B, with the lease deposit amounting to KRW 100 million, KRW 400 million monthly rent, and the lease term from March 31, 2012, respectively (hereinafter the above lease agreement referred to as “the first lease agreement in this case”; and (d) Defendant B engaged in restaurant business on the said object.

B. However, as Defendant B was in arrears, the Plaintiff and Defendant B agreed on September 22, 2013 to reduce part of the leased object under the instant lease agreement and to change the rent to KRW 3 million per month.

(C) The term “instant modified lease agreement” and the term “instant modified lease agreement” as mentioned above is the same as the term “instant modified lease agreement.”

Around July 3, 2014, Defendant B subleted the above leased object to Defendant D without the Plaintiff’s consent.

Defendant D had been transferred by Defendant B the above leased object while the auction procedure was in progress from Defendant C, and operated restaurant business in this place with Defendant C, who was the wife, around March 18, 2015, and the J acquired the ownership by winning a successful bid for the above E building F or G, including the leased object, and then transferred the above leased object to J around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of all pleadings.

Summary of the Parties' Claims

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B was that the Plaintiff leased the building F-1/2, H-3/4, and I or G to Defendant B on or around September 22, 2013, but the leased object was changed to 1/2, and K or G on or around September 22, 2013, Defendant B was omitted from the leased object of this case.