1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is KRW 51,250,400 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 7, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant under which the building indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) was leased as KRW 55 million from September 1, 2014 to August 31, 2016, and KRW 270,000,000 per month of rent (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) during the lease period.

In the instant lease agreement, the instant lease agreement entered into a special agreement stating that “the management cost of KRW 7.60,000 is separate.”

B. On September 2, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the lease on the ground that the lease term expires, and the said notification reached the Defendant around that time.

C. According to the collective building ledger, the 4th floor of the instant building is the 396.74 square meters for business facilities (offices), and the section for common use is the 100.38 square meters for the machinery room, corridor, electricity room, 186.54 square meters for the section for exclusive use, and 47.19 square meters for the section for common use.

The total area of each section for exclusive use on the fourth and fifth floor is 583.28 square meters.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1, 2, and 7 evidence (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine the determination on the request for the delivery of a building among the principal lawsuit. According to Article 639(1) of the Civil Act, this case is deemed to have been leased on the same condition as the lease was extended if the lessor did not raise any objection within a reasonable period after the expiration of the lease term, which is not subject to Article 10(4) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, and the lessee continues to use and benefit from the leased object. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff notified the termination of the lease on September 2, 2016, which was two days after the expiration of the lease term. Thus, the lease contract of this case was terminated on August 31, 2016.

As to this, the defendant requires the renewal of the lease contract of this case between six months and one month before the expiration of the lease term of this case.