(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

B. From February 28, 2016, the above buildings.

A. On May 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Nonparty C, D, E, and Ansan-si with the terms that deposit KRW 100,000 per month, rent KRW 10,00,00 per month, and lease period from May 31, 2014 to May 30, 2017.

B. As to the buildings listed in the attached list among the above buildings, the Plaintiff entered into a sublease contract with the Defendant and the deposit KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1.650,00 (including value-added tax) and the sublease period from March 1, 2015 to February 2017, respectively.

C. The Defendant did not pay the rent after February 2016, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to cancel the sub-lease contract without a separate peremptory notice in the event that the monthly rent and management expenses are in arrears at least twice.

(Article 7. (Reasons for Recognition) / [Article 7.) of the Exclusive Loan Agreement] The fact that there is no dispute, each entry of subparagraphs A1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to each of the above facts of recognition, the defendant delayed two or more rents, and the copy of the complaint of this case containing the plaintiff's declaration of intention to rescind is delivered to the defendant, and the sub-lease contract of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant was rescinded. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, and pay the plaintiff the money calculated at the rate of KRW 1,650,00 per month from February 28, 2016 to the completion date of delivery of the building of this case from February 28, 2016 to the end date of delivery of the building of this case.

In regard to this, the defendant's assertion that the defendant's failure to pay the rent was justified to avoid the risk of double payment. Thus, the defendant's assertion is not acceptable, since the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other ground to recognize it.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.