1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

B. From December 2, 2019, the above-mentioned A

subsection (b).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 2, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the attached list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”) with regard to the building as indicated in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”), stating that deposit KRW 10,000,000 for monthly rent, KRW 650,000 for the lease period, and the lessee’s delayed rent from April 2, 2015 to April 2, 2016, if the lessee’s delayed rent amounts to two rents, the lessor may terminate the lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) (hereinafter “Article 4”), and the Defendant was transferred the instant building and operated the restaurant.

B. Even after the expiration of the lease term, the instant lease contract was impliedly renewed, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to reduce the monthly rent to KRW 600,000 from January 2018.

C. On January 1, 2019, the Defendant did not pay the rent of 1.2,5, and June (the sum of KRW 4.4 million) to the Plaintiff, each of which was transferred to the Plaintiff as KRW 1.2 million immediately after being served with a duplicate of the instant complaint, and KRW 1.2 million on July 23, 2019, and later, paid the Plaintiff the rent, including that, until December 1, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 3 evidence, Eul 1 and 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. In the case of a lease of a commercial building as to whether the termination of the lease contract of this case is legitimate, if the delayed amount of rent of a lessee reaches the amount of three years of rent, the lessor may terminate the lease contract (Article 10-8 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act). Thus, the Plaintiff asserted that the lease of this case was terminated on the ground that the delayed amount of rent reaches the amount of two years of rent as stipulated in Article 4 of the lease contract of this case. However, the lease of this case is governed by the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, and the Defendant’s delayed amount reaches the amount of four years of rent, and thus, the effect of termination is not affected.

According to the above facts of recognition, the annual rent of the defendant reaches the four-year rent, and on this ground.