1. From 12,600,000 to 12,600, the Defendant’s stores are indicated in the separate sheet from February 1, 2018.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 16, 2014, the Defendant leased the store specified in paragraph (1) from E, and two other persons, the owner of each store listed in the separate sheet, as of January 31, 2017, by setting the deposit amount of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 20 million, and due date of January 31, 2017. Around March 2015, the store specified in paragraph (2) was leased by setting the deposit amount of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 11 million, and due date of March 31, 2017.

B. The Plaintiffs acquired the ownership of each of the instant stores from May 24, 2016 and two others.

C. On November 2016, the Plaintiffs notified the Defendant of his/her intention not to renew each of the above lease agreements, and the Defendant delayed to pay the rent for January 2017.

In order to pay rent for January and February 2017, the Defendant newly known the account to be remitted to the Plaintiffs, but the Plaintiffs notified that the lease contract was terminated due to the cause of rent delay without notifying the Plaintiffs of the termination, and filed the instant lawsuit seeking delivery of the store and payment of overdue rent.

After that, the Defendant deposited the rent from September 2017 to September 2017, but again, the Defendant did not pay the rent for four months from October 2017 to January 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, since the lease contract for each of the stores of this case was terminated by the plaintiffs' expression of intention to terminate the lease contract on the grounds of the defendant's failure to pay rent for more than three months, the defendant is obligated to deliver each of the stores of this case to the plaintiffs as well as to receive the remaining amount obtained by deducting the deposit of 12.6 million won (25 million won - the overdue four months - the overdue four months - the overdue four months 12.4 million won) from the plaintiffs, from February 1, 2018 to the date the delivery is completed.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims are accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are groundless.