The term of the lease was extended on January 31, 2018 by the implied renewal twice, and the rent for the defendant was changed to KRW 7,400,000 per annum.

On January 31, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant and C of his intention not to renew the lease six months prior to the termination of the lease.

In November 2018, the defendant operated the car center in the above building by November 2018, and currently has no longer been operated, but has neglected the articles listed in attached Form 2, which are owned by the defendant in the above building.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of recognition of the cause of the claim, since the lease between the Plaintiff and the Defendant terminated on January 31, 2018, the Defendant, barring any special circumstance, is obligated to collect from the Plaintiff each of the items listed in the separate sheet 2,840,000, remaining after deducting the amount equivalent to the rent for the period of ten months (from February 11, 2018 to February 2018) that the Defendant continued to occupy and use the said building after the termination of the lease from the deposit deposit of KRW 9,00,000 for the Defendant, barring special circumstances.

3. On January 25, 2018, the defendant's defense that the defendant requested renewal of the lease to the plaintiff on the basis of Article 10 (1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act. Thus, the lease period is extended and is still in existence.

The evidence attached to the Defendant’s written reply, which was deemed to have been stated on the first day for pleading of the entire pleadings, was considered only to the purport of the entire pleadings, since the Defendant continued to be absent on the date for pleading, and thus, the evidence was not examined.

A documentary evidence shall be the date for pleading, except when it is examined outside the court.