1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiffs the real estate stated in the separate sheet.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. D The same year is applicable to the real estate listed in the separate sheet that was approved for use on March 13, 2008 (hereinafter “instant commercial building”).

4. On April 28, 200, deposit money was KRW 40 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.2 million, lease period was set from April 28, 2008 to 24 months (hereinafter “lease Agreement”), and around that time, the commercial building was handed over to the Defendant.

B. D and E completed each registration of initial ownership relating to the shares of 1/2 of the instant commercial buildings on June 3, 2008.

C. On April 28, 2014, D, at the Defendant’s request, revised the term “208 years” to “2014,” and the term “24 months” to “12 months,” and issued it to the Defendant.

On the other hand, on September 7, 2015, each of the plaintiffs 1/4 shares in D and E's shares in the commercial buildings of this case on September 7, 2015.

7.3. Completion of the registration of ownership transfer by reason of sale.

E. Plaintiff A: (a) January 13, 2016; and (b) the same year

2. On January 15, 200, each of the instant lease contracts was notified to the Defendant on the 15th day of the same month, and the Plaintiffs expressed the Defendant’s explicit or implied intent to refuse the Defendant’s request for renewal of the instant lease contract.

[Reasons for Recognition] Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, 8, and Eul's evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. According to the facts found in the determination as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease contract was explicitly renewed after the lapse of 24 months from April 28, 2008, and it was re-scheduled once again after the lapse of 12 months from April 28, 2014, which was the expiration date of the instant modified contract, stipulated in the instant modified contract drafted on April 28, 2014. However, even though the lease contract was implicitly renewed at least once after the lapse of 12 months from April 28, 2014, the Plaintiffs’ express or implied refusal to renew the lease period had been between six months and one month prior to the expiration date of the lease term.