1. The defendant delivers the building indicated in the attached list to the plaintiff, and from August 15, 2017 to the above building.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The facts in the attached form of claim as to the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged according to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and the whole pleadings.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver to the Plaintiff the building indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) and pay the Plaintiff money calculated by the rate of KRW 4,350,000 per month from August 15, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the instant building.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to this, the Defendant expressed his/her intention to renew the instant lease agreement again to the Plaintiff. However, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff would be protected for a five-year period as stipulated in Article 10 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act if the Plaintiff does not comply therewith, and therefore, Article 10(2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act provides, “The lessee’s right to request renewal of the contract may only be exercised within the extent that the entire term of lease including the initial term of lease does not exceed five years.” In full view of the facts recognized above and the evidence and the purport of the whole arguments, the instant lease agreement is merely a succession of the previous lease agreement that was concluded before August 2012 between the former owner of the instant building and the Defendant, and it cannot be deemed a new lease agreement. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the right to request renewal of the contract cannot be recognized to the Defendant as the whole more than five years under Article 10(2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. In addition, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the term of lease the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded is not three years but ten years. However, in light of the fact that the term of lease stipulated in the instant lease agreement (Evidence A No. 1), which is a disposal document, is written until May 14, 2017, etc.