(a) deliver the real estate listed in the annex;

B. From March 11, 2020, the above real estate.

A. On May 19, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant on a deposit for lease deposit of KRW 7,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 700,000 (payment after the 11th of each month), term of lease of KRW 2 years from June 11, 2018 to June 10, 2020 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and received the said lease deposit from the Defendant, and handed over the instant real estate to the Defendant.

B. On May 13, 2019, the Defendant paid KRW 700,000 to the Plaintiff, which was paid after April 11, 2019, and was not paid at all since May 2019.

C. Article 4 of the instant lease agreement provides that the lessor may immediately terminate the contract in the event that the lessee’s delayed delay reaches the amount of three years of rent.

The Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the ground of the delinquency in rent for at least three years on the service of a duplicate of the complaint of this case.

E. KRW 7,000,000 was deducted from the unpaid rent for ten months from May 11, 2019 to March 10, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, since the lease contract of this case seems to have been lawfully terminated due to the delay in rent for more than three years by the defendant, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff and return the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to KRW 700,000 per month from March 11, 2020 to the completion date of delivery of the real estate of this case.

3. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant’s husband C on June 17, 2019 and the same year.

7. 1. The plaintiff asserts that he paid a sum of KRW 1,400,000 in cash to the plaintiff as rent, but the defendant's assertion is not accepted since there is no evidence to prove this.

4. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is ordered to accept it.