On May 10, 2010, the Plaintiff leased a building listed in the attached list (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”) to the Defendant as KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 750,000, and the period from June 10, 2010 to June 9, 2013.

The plaintiff delivered the above building to the defendant around that time, and received deposit KRW 10 million from the defendant, and the defendant started real estate brokerage business in the above building.

Since then, the Plaintiff and the Defendant have renewed the lease relationship of the instant building. On April 15, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that he/she had no intention to continue the lease relationship and that he/she would deliver the instant building.

Around October 2014, the Defendant was a director of the instant building and thereafter did not run the business in the instant building. From April 2015, the Defendant did not pay a monthly rent.

【In light of the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the fact of the above recognition as to the claim for delivery of the entire purport of the pleadings, the lease relationship of the building of this case is terminated, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff.

The defendant asserts that the lease period has been renewed by June 9, 2016 pursuant to Article 10 (4) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, but Article 10 (2) of the same Act provides that the lessee's right to request renewal can only be exercised within the extent that the whole lease period including the initial lease period does not exceed five years, so the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

In addition, the defendant asserts that he cannot accept the plaintiff's claim until he receives the refund of KRW 10 million. Thus, since the defendant's obligation to deliver the leased object and the obligation to return the deposit when the lease relationship is terminated, the above argument of the defendant is justified.

Therefore, the defendant is worth KRW 10 million from the plaintiff.