A. On February 6, 2013, the Plaintiffs purchased real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from Nonparty D and E and co-owners jointly own one half of each share. The Defendant, around December 201, is a lessee who entered into a lease contract with Nonparty D and the lease contract with respect to the instant real estate at issue as of December 2, 201, and is operating a singing practice room called “Fing” in the instant real estate as the lessee who entered into the lease contract with Nonparty D and E, with a period from December 15, 2011 to December 36, 2011.

B. At the time of the purchase of the instant real estate, the Plaintiffs received a different lease agreement from the above D, stating that the said G becomes a lessee, the lease period of three years from September 30, 2010, the lease deposit of five million won, and the monthly rent of four million won. The Plaintiffs promised to deliver the instant real estate from the said D and E until October 30, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including satisfy number) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and its judgment

A. On December 15, 2014, the Plaintiffs agreed to deliver the instant real estate to the Defendant by December 15, 2014, as to the termination and implied renewal of the lease agreement.

However, since the Plaintiffs notified the Plaintiffs of the refusal to renew the lease agreement between six months and one month before the expiration of the lease agreement pursuant to Article 10(4) and (1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, the lease agreement for the instant real estate was terminated on December 15, 2014.

Therefore, the defendant asserts that he/she is obligated to deliver the instant real estate at the above date and pay money at the rate of 400,000 won per month from December 15, 2014 to the completion date of delivery. The defendant asserts that the lease contract was implicitly renewed in accordance with Article 10(4) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act.

In this case, the defendant did so on the above date and time.