1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 26, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 6,780,00, monthly rent of KRW 107,600, and the period from February 1, 2012 to January 31, 2014.

B. According to Article 10(1)8 of the instant lease agreement, where a lessee fails to conclude a renewal contract even after the lease term expires, the lessor may terminate the lease contract.

C. Although the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the lease contract will be renewed several times, the Defendant did not conclude the renewal contract.

On July 10, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the lease contract was terminated on the ground that the lease contract was not renewed.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 3, whole purport of pleading

2. Assertion and determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, since the instant lease contract was terminated by the Plaintiff’s notice of termination on July 10, 2015, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant's argument as to the defendant's assertion that he was only a contractor in his name, and the defendant's live-in person with a defect of hearing disability 4 is paid lease deposit, rent, and management expenses. Thus, the plaintiff asserts that he should enter into a lease contract with the defendant's live-in person, considering the purport of building the rental apartment.

In this case where the plaintiff seeks delivery of a building against the defendant on the ground of termination of the lease agreement, the defendant's assertion refusing delivery of the building is without merit, on the ground that the plaintiff should enter into a contract with a third party, not a party to the lease agreement of this case.

Furthermore, the defendant's live together is entitled to enter into a lease contract with the plaintiff under the same conditions as the defendant.

The plaintiff is obligated to enter into a lease contract with the defendant.