1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

(a) Attached Form 2 among the first floor of the building listed in Annex 2.

1. Facts of recognition;

가. 원고는 2006. 4. 10. 피고에게 별지 목록 제1항 기재 토지(이하 ‘이 사건 토지’라 한다)와 같은 목록 제2항 기재 건물의 1층 중 별지 도면 표시 1, 2, 3, 4, 1의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 ㈎부분 77㎡(이하 ‘이 사건 1동 건물’이라 한다)를 임대보증금 2,700만 원, 차임 월 100만 원, 임대기간 5년으로 정하여 임대하되, 이 사건 토지상에 피고가 건축주 명의를 원고로 하여 세차장 건물을 신축하고 임대차기간 만료시 피고가 원고에게 위 세차장 건물을 증여하기로 하는 내용의 임대차계약(이하 ‘이 사건 임대차계약’이라 한다)을 체결하였다.

B. According to the instant lease agreement, the Defendant newly constructed each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet Nos. 3 and 4 (hereinafter “instant 2 and 3 buildings”) in the name of the owner as the Plaintiff, respectively.

C. Since April 9, 2011, the instant lease agreement was explicitly renewed, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant lease agreement by mail with the content-certified as of March 7, 2017, and on July 4, 2017, registered the preservation of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff with respect to the instant 2, 3 buildings.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence (including paper numbers), Eul evidence, and the result of fact inquiry about appraiser D by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the principal lawsuit

A. The land of this case and the part of the building of this case, and the lease contract which is implicitly renewed pursuant to Article 639(1) of the Civil Act shall be deemed to have been renewed on the same condition as the former lease except for the term of existence, and the renewed lease contract shall be deemed to be a lease contract with no agreement for the term of validity.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Da14720 Decided June 25, 2004, etc.). According to the fact that the above recognition was made on the instant case, the instant lease agreement was concluded on April 10, 201.