1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant, from the plaintiff 1 to the plaintiff 30 million won, on 2016.

1. The reasons for this part of the underlying facts are as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance court (1. basic facts) except that the phrase “ February 3, 2010” in Part 2 of the judgment of the second instance shall be deemed to read “ February 23, 2010” in Part 15 of the judgment of the second instance.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. On September 15, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the part on the claim for the delivery of the leased object of this case would refuse to renew the instant lease agreement, and the fact that the instant lease term expires on December 20, 2014 is as seen earlier.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the instant lease contract terminated on December 20, 2014, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the leased object to the Plaintiff.

B. Even after the termination of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant continued to operate convenience points on the leased object of this case, and the amount of profit from the possession and use of ordinary real estate is equivalent to the rent of the real estate. Barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated by applying the rate of KRW 1.8 million per month from December 21, 2014, which is the day following the termination date of the instant lease agreement, to the day of delivery of the leased object of this case.

However, on July 8, 2016, the Plaintiff recognized the fact that the Defendant received the full amount of monthly rent from the Defendant from April 24, 2016 on the third day for pleading of the trial on July 8, 2016. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the unjust enrichment that the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff shall be the amount calculated by the ratio of KRW 1.8 million per month from April 25, 2016, the following day of the said payment to the date of the completion of delivery of the object for lease of this case.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The reasoning of the judgment on the assertion on renewal of a lease agreement is stated in this part of the judgment of the court of first instance 3.

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of renewal.