1.The part concerning the merits of the judgment of the first instance, including a claim for exchange change in the trial, is as follows:

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff owns a building indicating the attached property (hereinafter “instant store”), and the Defendants operated a restaurant with the trade name “D” at the said store, and Defendant B is the children of Defendant C.

B. On September 19, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendants for a lease deposit of KRW 20,000,000 for the instant store, KRW 2,500,00 for monthly rent (excluding value-added tax), and from September 20, 201 to September 19, 2013, the Plaintiff leased the instant store to the Defendants for a period from September 20, 201 to September 24, 201, and the Defendants paid the said lease deposit to the Plaintiff and operated the said restaurant after receiving delivery from the Plaintiff.

Since September 19, 2013, the term of lease expires, the above term of lease was increased to KRW 2,800,000 (value-added tax separate) on September 15, 2015, and continued to be renewed until September 30, 2016 under the same conditions as the previous term.

C. On September 30, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter referred to as “lease 3-6”) with the Defendants that the Plaintiff leased the instant store to the Defendants for six months from September 30, 2016, by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 3,300,000 (including value-added tax of KRW 300,000), monthly rent of monthly rent of KRW 30,000, monthly rent of monthly rent of KRW 30,00, and the lease period of the instant store from September 30, 2016 to March 30, 2017.

On October 21, 2016, the Plaintiff sent content certification (Evidence A No. 4-1) to the Defendants. Its purport is that the Plaintiff did not intend to renew the said lease after March 30, 2017, which is the expiration date of the instant lease term.

On July 5, 2017, the Plaintiff sent content certification (Evidence A No. 4-2) to the Defendants. The purport thereof is that even if the instant lease agreement was not terminated on March 30, 2017, the Plaintiff notify the Defendants of the termination of the said lease agreement on the ground of at least three stiffies.

On August 1, 2017, the Plaintiff issued the notice of termination to the Defendants.