토지인도등
1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff each real estate indicated in the indication of the attached real estate, and each of the above real estate from August 1, 2014.
1. Comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number, if any) as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff entered into a lease contract with the defendant on January 1, 2013 with respect to each real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter "each real estate of this case") with the lease deposit of KRW 20 million, the rent of KRW 650,000,000 (payment on January 15), the lease term of the lease from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2015 (hereinafter "the lease contract of this case"). The plaintiff delivered each of the real estate of this case to the defendant on January 1, 2013, the defendant did not pay the rent from August 1, 2014, it is evident that the lease term of this case continues to exist, despite the plaintiff's request, and it is evident that the lease contract of this case has lapsed.
Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver each of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from August 1, 2014 to the day the delivery of each of the said real estate was completed, with the rate of KRW 650,000 per month from August 1, 2014,
As to this, the defendant asserts that the defendant has a duty to reimburse the defendant for the beneficial costs corresponding thereto, since he had repaired boiler, water supply and electric installations while remodeling the building listed in the separate sheet No. 3.
According to the evidence No. 1, the plaintiff and the defendant stated in the lease contract of this case, the plaintiff and the defendant cannot claim for any facilities, premium, etc. upon the termination of the lease contract of this case, and they must return to the original state (Article 3 of the lease contract of this case). It is recognized that the lessee agreed to restore the leased object to its original state at the termination of the lease contract of this case and to order the lessor to do so.