A. The Defendants deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. The Defendants are the defendants.

A. On July 26, 2005, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement between the Defendants and the instant building with the term of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.2 million, and the term of lease from September 1, 2005 to August 31, 2007.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The Defendants received delivery of the instant building from the Plaintiff on September 1, 2005, and operated the Raba Plue of “F”.

C. Around August 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendants of the termination of the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the delinquency of rent for at least two months, and the said notification reached the Defendants around that time.

On February 8, 2015, after the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff sold 1/2 shares in each of the instant building to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff. On February 26, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of each of the instant building under the name of the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 8 (including a provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the plaintiff's successor's claim

A. According to the above facts, the instant lease agreement is deemed to have been lawfully terminated as the notice of termination around August 2014, on the grounds of the Defendants’ delinquency in the rent. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor, the assignee of the instant building, is obligated to deliver the instant building. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to deliver the instant building, and the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 1,200,000 per month from March 7, 2015 in the case of Defendant D, the day following the delivery of the instant complaint, as sought by the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor, and from February 15, 2015 in the case of Defendant E, from the completion date of delivery of each of the instant building to the completion date of delivery of each of the instant building.

3. As to the instant lease agreement on the instant building, the Plaintiff’s determination on the Plaintiff’s claim did not delay the Defendants’ payment of more than two months.