1. The Defendants are listed in the separate sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the two floors of the real estate listed in the separate sheet from the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

가. 원고는 2012. 12. 22.경 피고들과 사이에 별지 목록 건물의 2층 중 별지 도면 기재 1, 2, 3, 4, 1의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 ㈎ 부분(이하 ‘이 사건 임차건물’이라고 한다)에 관하여 임대차보증금 30,000,000원, 임대차기간 2013. 1. 21.부터 2014. 1. 21.까지로 정하여 임차하는 내용의 임대차계약(이하 ‘이 사건 임대차계약’이라고 한다)을 체결하고, 그 무렵 피고들에게 위 임대차보증금을 지급한 후 이 사건 임차건물을 인도받았다.

B. After that, the Plaintiff and the Defendants extended the term of the instant lease agreement on January 21, 2015.

C. On November 7, 2014, the Plaintiff sent the content-certified mail to the effect that the Plaintiff would not renew the instant lease agreement to the Defendants, and thus, the Plaintiff would return the lease deposit upon termination of the lease agreement.

As the Defendants did not refund the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff filed an application for the registration of housing lease for the instant leased building with the Chuncheon District Court 2015Kag16 against the Defendants, and received an order for the registration of housing lease from the said court on January 23, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the above lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants was terminated on January 21, 2015, and barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are obliged to return the lease deposit amount of KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff at the same time as the delivery of the instant leased building from the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

B. As to the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants asserted that the instant lease agreement was renewed by January 21, 2016 on the grounds that the Plaintiff would extend the instant lease agreement around July 2014, but the said agreement was renewed by January 21, 2016. However, the Plaintiff and the Defendants were to extend the instant lease agreement for one year.