(a) the indication E, f, g, h, of the Attached Form Nos. 1 and 2, of the real estate listed in the Schedule;

A. The plaintiff on July 3, 2007 between the defendant B and the plaintiff on July 3, 2007, the plaintiff's order 1-A.

The term of each of the real estate listed in the subsection (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant B, setting the deposit amount of KRW 10 million, KRW 500,000 per month (payment on July 5), and the term of lease from July 3, 2007 to July 2, 2009.

B. On July 3, 2007, Defendant B received each of the instant real estate from the Plaintiff and used the said respective real estate and the adjoining family rooms as D reconstruction Association offices.

C. After paying the Plaintiff the rent for July and August 2007, Defendant B delayed the payment of the rent after September 5, 2007, and paid KRW 700,000 to the Plaintiff around January 2016.

Defendant C is in possession and use of each of the instant real estate since June 2016 upon Defendant B’s request that the said reconstruction project will be carried out.

E. On September 27, 2016, the Plaintiff notified Defendant B of the termination of the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the foregoing Defendant’s delinquency in paying two or more rents, and the following notice reached Defendant B.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. (1) As to the claim against Defendant B, the Plaintiff alleged that the instant lease agreement was implicitly renewed and terminated by the Plaintiff’s notice of termination, and thus, the Defendant is liable to deliver each of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and to pay the Plaintiff the overdue rent and the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent by the completion date of delivery.

As to this, the Defendant’s instant lease agreement was terminated on July 3, 2009, and the overdue rent up to the expiration date was deducted from the deposit, and thereafter, the Defendant did not properly use each of the instant real estate. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent after the termination.