1. The defendant shall deliver the building as stated in the attached Form to the plaintiff.

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

3.Paragraph 1.

1. The plaintiff is the owner of the building listed in the attached Form (hereinafter referred to as the "building of this case"), and the fact that the defendant occupies the building of this case as of the date of closing argument of this case can be acknowledged by either party or by adding the whole purport of the pleading in the evidence No. 4.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

2. As to the defendant's defense

A. On March 1, 2013, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement on the instant building with the former lessee D of the instant building where the Plaintiff’s mother C (the actual owner of the instant building) acting on behalf of the Plaintiff’s mother C (the actual owner of the instant building) respectively.

(A) A lease agreement claiming that the Defendant entered into the instant building, as above, is called the instant lease agreement. Home D was not delegated by C with the authority to enter into the instant lease agreement.

Even if C was remitted from June 5, 2013 to the Defendant, it did not raise any objection against the remittance of the tea stipulated in the instant lease agreement, and it was said that C directly accepted the Defendant’s request for repair of the instant building. In light of such circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff or C ratified the conclusion of the instant lease agreement.

Meanwhile, Article 10 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act applies to the instant building as a commercial building. Since the Plaintiff, a lessor of the instant lease agreement, did not notify the Defendant of the refusal to renew or change the terms and conditions from six months to one month before the expiration of the term, the instant lease agreement was implicitly renewed until March 1, 2017.

In addition, the defendant's legal brief dated January 18, 2017.