A. Defendant B Co., Ltd shall deliver the real estate listed in the attached list to Defendant B, as from November 29, 2016.

A. On February 5, 2016, the Plaintiff, as the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”), entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant Company with respect to the said building as follows.

- A lessor and a lessee company - 20,000 won for lease deposit - 210,000 won for each month of rent (additional tax, prepaid payment on February 29, 2016) - From February 29, 2016 to February 28, 2017

B. From February 29, 2016, Defendant Company occupied and used the instant building under the said lease agreement to the present date, but did not pay the Plaintiff rent from September 29, 2016.

C. On February 21, 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant Company that the instant lease agreement will be terminated if the Plaintiff did not pay the unpaid car by February 23, 2017.

Nevertheless, on September 20, 2017, after the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit, the Defendant Company paid only KRW 4.62,00,000,000, which is the amount equivalent to the overdue rent for two months, and did not pay the remainder of the unpaid rent. Defendant C and D occupy and use the instant building on the ground that they are the representative director of the Defendant Company.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated around February 23, 2017. As such, the Defendant Company is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff the rent of KRW 2310,000 per month from November 29, 2016 to the completion date of delivery of the said building, and Defendant C and D, who are not entitled to lawfully occupy the instant building, are obligated to leave the instant building.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant company is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remainder is dismissed as it is without merit. As to the burden of litigation costs, Articles 98 and 101 of the Civil Procedure Act are applicable.