(a) remove the buildings listed in Annex 1 and the land listed in Annex 2 in Annex 1;

A. In around 1976, the Plaintiff, as the owner of the land listed in the attached Table (2) of the attached Table (hereinafter “instant land”), entered into a lease agreement with the deceased C, the Defendant’s attached list, stating that the instant land is the annual 1 Ama of 1000 and that it will be used until the Plaintiff’s request for delivery (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. Upon the death of the Defendant’s father C, the Defendant succeeded to the above lease agreement with the Plaintiff and agreed to use the instant land continuously by the Defendant, but at the same time, to the effect that it is the annual rent of KRW 300,000.

C. The Defendant has installed and used the buildings, such as plastic houses, etc. (hereinafter “instant building”) on the instant land as shown in the attached Table (1).

On December 17, 2015, the Plaintiff removed the instant building to the Defendant by March 31, 2016, and notified the Defendant of the delivery of the instant land. The notice of termination reached the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above determination, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on June 17, 2016 after six months from the date the Defendant received the notice of termination.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to remove the instant building to the Plaintiff, deliver the instant land, and pay the amount calculated by applying the rate of KRW 250,000 per month from January 1, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the instant land to unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 250,00 per month.

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