1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Defendants from the Plaintiff at KRW 17,889,00 to February 1, 2014.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, 9, 10 (including serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Eul evidence No. 3, with a comprehensive view to the whole purport of the pleadings:

On September 26, 201, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached list owned by the Plaintiff to Defendant A, KRW 13,761,00 per deposit, KRW 109,50 per month of rent, and KRW 109,50 per October 31, 201 from September 26, 2011 to October 31, 2013. On January 10, 2013, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the same list owned by the Plaintiff with the deposit amount of KRW 4,128,00, KRW 32,850 per month of rent, and KRW 32,850 from January 10, 2013 to February 28, 2014.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”) B.

The Defendants, together with the instant real estate, occupied and used the instant real estate while operating a restaurant in the instant real estate.

2. According to the facts of the determination on the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was terminated on October 31, 2013 and February 28, 2014, and thus, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, who is the lessor of the instant lease agreement, barring any special circumstance.

3. Determination as to the defendants' defense

A. The defendants, pursuant to Article 10(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, requested the plaintiff to renew the lease agreement of this case prior to the termination date of the lease agreement of this case, and there was no ground for refusing to renew the lease agreement of this case under the proviso of Article 10(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, and therefore, the lease contract of this case was renewed. However, there is no evidence to prove that the defendant A requested the renewal of the lease contract of this case between six months and one month before the termination date of the lease contract of this case. Thus, the defendants' defenses do not need further be examined.

B. The defendants 1 are the defendants' defense of simultaneous performance of this case from the plaintiff.