1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the following amount:

1. As to the unpaid rent claim

A. On January 10, 2014, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion leased to the Defendant the entire first basement (hereinafter “instant building”) of the building on the ground of Busan Nam-gu C, Busan. Since the Defendant did not pay KRW 18,200,00 in total the rent from April 10, 2014 to June 9, 2016, the Plaintiff should pay that the Plaintiff is unpaid.

B. Determination 1) According to the purport of the evidence No. 2-1 and the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff and the Defendant around April 2014 enter into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the building of this case as between the lease deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 700,000 (in advance payment, the 10th day of each month), and the period of April 10, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

(2) According to the above facts, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid rent of KRW 16,800,000 (=70,000 x 24 months) and delay damages therefrom, as the instant lease agreement expired on April 9, 2016.

3) As to this, the Plaintiff asserts that the lease contract of this case was not terminated even until June 2016, claiming that the Plaintiff is unpaid due to implied renewal of the lease contract of this case.

Article 639(1) of the Civil Code provides that "When a lessee continues to use a leased object or to take profits after the expiration of the lease term, if the lessor fails to raise an objection within a reasonable period, the lessee shall be deemed to have leased object under the same conditions as the former lease."

This provision does not raise any objection against the lessor, even though the lessee uses and takes profits from the leased object without returning it after the lease term expires.