1. The defendant attached to the plaintiff

1. Attached Form among the first floor of the building specified in paragraph (1) of the list;

2.The drawing(s) No. 1, 2, 3.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 201, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant on a store and coffee store and renewed it. On June 29, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant for the lease deposit of KRW 20,000,000, annual rent of KRW 20,000, annual rent of KRW 20,000, and from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. The Defendant is running a business in possession of the C shop and D coffee store, and paid the amount equivalent to the rent by December 31, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, 12, Eul evidence No. 3 (including various numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion not only notified the Defendant of the refusal to renew the instant lease agreement on or around May 12, 2017, but also agreed with the intent on the termination of the term of validity without the renewal of the instant lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. As such, the instant lease was terminated on June 30, 2017, the Defendant is obligated to deliver C stores and D coffee points to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from July 1, 2017 to the completion of delivery of C stores and D coffee stores.

B. Defendant’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff did not notify the Defendant of the refusal to renew the instant lease one month prior to the termination of the instant lease agreement, and the instant lease agreement was implicitly renewed and continued until June 30, 2018. (2) As if the Plaintiff continued to maintain the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff granted trust to the Defendant as if the Plaintiff continued to maintain the instant lease agreement, and concluded the lease agreement even though it granted the Defendant’s fundamental facility construction, including electrical construction, and the design construction.