1.The judgment of the first instance, including the claims extended in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 13, 2009, the Plaintiff leased 401 of Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seoul and J 5th floor multi-household housing (hereinafter “instant building”) from C and F, with a deposit of KRW 110 million from C and F, and the lease period of KRW 2 years from August 31, 2009, and all of the deposits paid around that time.

B. On December 24, 2009, SPP Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “SP”) purchased the instant building from C, F, and two other persons, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 20, 2010.

C. On August 13, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with 125 million won as to the building of this case, and from August 13, 201, two years from August 13, 201, the Plaintiff decided to substitute KRW 110 million as the existing deposit, and paid KRW 15 million as the increased on the same day to YE.

On October 8, 2012, the Defendant purchased the instant building from YSB for KRW 210 million from the purchase price, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 9, 2012.

On the same day, the defendant completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage consisting of the maximum debt amount of KRW 130 million, the debtor, the defendant, and the mortgagee G on the same day.

E. G filed an application for voluntary auction of the instant building with the Seoul Central District Court H on April 11, 2013, based on the foregoing right to collateral security, and the Plaintiff acquired ownership by purchasing the instant building at KRW 180 million in a voluntary auction procedure conducted accordingly and paying the purchase price in full on November 21, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, Gap evidence No. 8-1, 2, Gap evidence No. 9-1, 2, and Gap evidence No. 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that he succeeded to the status of a lessor under the Housing Lease Protection Act is that the Plaintiff completed the move-in report to the instant building after entering into a lease agreement with the United States Es.S. and received the fixed date.