1. On November 27, 2016, the Defendant shall enter from the Plaintiff the list from November 27, 2016 to November 27, 2016.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as stated in Gap evidence 1, 2, 7, and Eul evidence 3-1 to 3:

On November 27, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting forth a lease agreement between the Defendant as between November 27, 2014 and November 26, 2016, with respect to the portion of 86 square meters in the ship connected with each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 1, as to the leased deposit, KRW 30 million, monthly rent, and the lease agreement between November 27, 2014 and November 26, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Around that time, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the lease deposit amount of KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff.

B. Around that time, the Defendant received the delivery of the instant store from the Plaintiff and runs real estate brokerage business with the trade name “C” at the instant store.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease contract is terminated on November 26, 2016, when the said lease term expires, and even if the Defendant’s above lease term expires, it is clear that the Plaintiff will not deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff. Thus, the Plaintiff need to request in advance the return of the instant store.

I would like to say.

Therefore, upon the arrival of November 27, 2016, the day following the expiration date of the above lease term, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the Plaintiff with the remaining money obtained from the Plaintiff after deducting the money calculated by the ratio of KRW 30 million from November 27, 2016 to the delivery date of the instant store.

B. The defendant's assertion 1) The summary of the defendant's assertion is that the defendant expressed his/her intent to renew the lease contract of this case to the plaintiff. Thus, the lease contract of this case is a commercial building.