1. The defendant shall issue to the plaintiff each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the first floor of the real estate stated in the attached Form.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including the provisional number) as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff entered into a lease contract with the defendant on December 26, 2007 with respect to the store listed in Paragraph (1) of the Disposition No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as "the store in this case") owned by the plaintiff and the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "the store in this case"). The lease contract between January 24, 2008 and January 24, 2009 (hereinafter "the lease in this case"). ② The defendant operated the lease contract in this case with the trade name "C" at the store in this case. ③ The plaintiff agreed to renew the lease contract in this case with the defendant on June 24, 2014, the plaintiff sent the above notice to the defendant on June 24, 2015.

According to the above facts, the instant lease contract terminated on January 24, 2015, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. Defendant’s assertion 1) Chapter 1: Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (hereinafter “Commercial Building Lease Protection Act”).

Article 10(4) of the Act provides that where a lessor fails to notify a lessee of a rejection of renewal or to notify a lessee of a change in the conditions between six months and one month before the expiration of the lease term, the lease shall be deemed to have been renewed on the same condition as the former lease term expires, but the term of the lease shall be deemed to be one year. The Plaintiff’s peremptory notice dated June 24, 2014 is not made within the period prescribed in the above provision. Thus, the lease in this case is renewed on the same condition, and the term of the lease in this case shall be deemed to be January 23, 2016. 2) Chapter 2: The Plaintiff shall be deemed to have a business district where the Plaintiff was placed in a large amount without being sealed once by the Defendant.