(a) Of the buildings listed in the separate sheet, each point is indicated in the separate sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1.

A. Comprehensively taking into account the purport of each statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including household numbers), the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant around March 4, 2013 on the lease deposit amount of KRW 10 million for the lease deposit of KRW 550,00 won for the lease deposit of KRW 1,00,000 won for the lease deposit of KRW 1,000,000 won for the lease deposit of KRW 5,000,000 won for the lease deposit of KRW 1,2,3,4,5,5,6, and 1,000 won for the lease deposit of KRW 70,000,000 for the lease deposit of KRW 1,000,000 for the remainder payment of KRW 9,000,000 for the lease deposit of this case. The plaintiff and the defendant agreed to change the lease deposit of KRW 3,000 per month to the late payment of KRW 2,016 for the lease of this case to the defendant.

B. According to the facts of the above recognition, the instant lease contract was terminated on or around June 2016, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to restore the original state to the Plaintiff the amount calculated by applying the rate of KRW 700,000 per month from October 4, 2016 to the date of the completion of the delivery of unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff in sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1 of the annexed drawings among the buildings listed in the annexed list.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.