1. The defendant against the plaintiffs

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

B. From November 1, 2018, the above-mentioned A

(b).

1. Basic facts

A. On March 31, 2011, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with Nonparty D, setting the deposit amount of KRW 60,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,000,000, and the lease period of KRW 2,000 from April 10, 201 to April 9, 2013.

B. On June 10, 2015, the Plaintiffs purchased the instant building from D and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the shares of 1/2, respectively. On May 27, 2015, the Plaintiffs concluded a lease succession agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant on a deposit of KRW 60,00,000 for the instant building, KRW 2,00,000 for rent, KRW 2,000 for rent, and period of lease from April 10, 201 to April 9, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. Around February 8, 2018, the Plaintiffs sent to the Defendant a certificate of content stating “I have no intent to renew the instant lease contract, and will deliver it upon the expiration of the lease term,” and reached the Defendant around that time.

The defendant has occupied and used the building of this case until now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the rejection of renewal one month prior to the expiration of the lease term of this case. Thus, the lease contract of this case terminated on April 9, 2018, which is the expiration date of the lease term of this case.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiffs, and to pay the amount calculated by the ratio of KRW 1,000,000 per month to the Plaintiffs from November 1, 2018 to the completion date of delivery of the instant building as requested by the Plaintiffs.

B. The defendant's assertion argues that the plaintiffs interfered with or deprived of the opportunity to recover the premiums of the defendant who is a lessee without justifiable grounds, but the evidence submitted by the defendant alone interferes with or prevents the plaintiffs' opportunity to recover the premiums of the defendant.