1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver an annexed display shop;

B.As from November 28, 2013, the delivery of the said store.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a local public enterprise that manages and operates the 188 subway 7 high-speed terminal station of high speed terminals in Seocho-gu, Seoul. On April 14, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with another local public enterprise that manages and operates the 2nd floor space of the 188 subway line 7, high speed terminal station of the 2nd underground, and on April 14, 2008, with respect to the 794.91 square meters of the store in the said 1,051,650,000, monthly rent of KRW 116,850,000 (including value-added tax) and the lease period of the 116,850,000 (including value-added tax) and the lease period from June 14, 2008 to June 13, 2013 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. The Southern Cosmetics subleted the attached part of the above large-scale joint shop (hereinafter “instant store”) to the Korea L&D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) with the Plaintiff’s consent.

C. On April 1, 2010, Korea L&D and the Defendant entered into a transfer contract with the Defendant to renew the contract each year without the Plaintiff’s consent or consent, and without any special circumstance, Korea L&D leased the instant store to the Defendant for one year.

Around that time, the Defendant has been operating a clothing store with the trade name “Ngalgal” while occupying the instant store in Korea with the delivery of the instant store from Korea L&D until now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 13, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to Gap evidence Nos. 14 and Gap evidence Nos. 16, the plaintiff is a public enterprise established by Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the plaintiff has invested in the subway facilities including the high speed terminal station of 7 lines high speed terminal station of 2 stories underground, and there is no counter-proof.

In addition, the fact that the defendant occupies the store of this case is as seen earlier, so the defendant is obligated to deliver the store of this case to the plaintiff as the owner unless the right to possess the store of this case is recognized.

3...