On November 15, 2010, the Plaintiff leased a building listed in the attached list (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) to the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 5,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 300,000, and the term of lease from November 15, 2010 to November 14, 2012, and extended the term of the contract by one year from November 14, 2013 after the term of the lease expires.

After the expiration of the above extended lease contract, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to prepare a lease contract to increase the monthly rent of KRW 400,000,000, but the Defendant refused to do so and paid only KRW 350,000 to the Plaintiff as monthly rent.

Accordingly, on April 3, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that “The Defendant made an oral decision to increase the rent of KRW 400,000 to KRW 400,000,000 for the monthly rent, but the Defendant paid only KRW 350,000 for the monthly rent.”

On July 10, 2014, the agreement was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant that “The Plaintiff and the Defendant enter into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the instant building from November 15, 2013 to December 31, 2015, with the lease deposit amount of KRW 5,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 400,00, and the lease term of KRW 400,00,00 for the instant building.”

On December 1, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of the refusal of renewal by verbal means between six months and one month before the expiration of the term of the instant lease agreement, and notified the Plaintiff that no further extension of the contract was made by content-certified mail.

[Ground of recognition] The lease contract of this case was terminated on December 31, 2015 due to the expiration of the period of validity on December 31, 2015, according to the fact that there was no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, as well as the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the defendant'

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff and the defendant are existing from January 15, 2016 to the delivery date of the building of this case as requested by the plaintiff after the expiration of the lease term.