1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 2013, Nonparty E entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 1100,000,000, and two years (from July 10, 2013 to July 10, 2015) with respect to the first floor of the D Building No. 107 (hereinafter “instant store”) on the land of Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, and Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, and the Defendant handed over the instant store to the Defendant.

B. On October 18, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased the instant store from E and succeeded to the lessor’s status as the owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 10, 2014.

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

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On July 10, 2015, the purport of both claims is that the instant lease agreement expired, and if an implied renewal occurred, the Defendant did not pay a monthly rent after the expiration of the instant lease agreement, and thus, the instant lease agreement was terminated by the delivery of a duplicate of the instant complaint. Therefore, the Defendant terminated the instant lease agreement. The Defendant, for the Defendant’s business up to now, did not remove not only the signboards and promotion agent installed on the outer wall of the instant store, but also the internal house straws, etc. inside the store. Thus, the Defendant asserts that he is obligated to restore the instant store to its original state and deliver it to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant already delivered the instant store to the Plaintiff.

B. We examine the judgment, and since the fact that the lease contract of this case was terminated does not dispute the defendant, the defendant should deliver the store of this case to the plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

However, as above, the defendant has already asserted that the store of this case was delivered to the plaintiff, and in full view of the entries in Eul 2-1, 2-2, and 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant shall be entitled to the lease contract of this case.