A. Defendant B delivers each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and from July 7, 2017, the amount of KRW 38,500,000 and KRW 38,500.

A. On May 7, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) leased each real estate listed in the order owned by Defendant B with a deposit of KRW 50 million, monthly rent of KRW 6050,000; and (b) received 22,00,000 as a priority deposit; (c) Defendant B paid the delayed rent of KRW 27,50,000 to Nonparty E, the former lessee.

B. Defendant B, under the name of Defendant C and D, is operating “F” in each of the above real estate.

C. Meanwhile, even if Defendant B was in arrears and deducted a deposit of KRW 22 million, the unpaid rent as of July 6, 2017 is KRW 38.5 million.

Therefore, the Plaintiff terminated the lease contract on the grounds of the rent delay. The Plaintiff sought from July 7, 2017 to the day following the date of delivery of each of the above real estate, overdue rent of KRW 38.5 million, and from July 7, 2017 to the day after the delivery of each of the above real estate is completed.

2. Determination

A. Judgment as to Defendant B by deeming the confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

B. (1) It is evident that Defendant C and D did not enter into a lease contract with Defendant C and D on the Plaintiff’s assertion, and the mere fact that Defendant C and D possessed each of the above real estate jointly with Defendant C and D cannot be deemed as possessing the above real estate. Thus, the claim for rent or return of unjust enrichment and request for extradition against Defendant C and D is without merit.

(2) However, the request for extradition includes the request for eviction, and according to the evidence Nos. 3-1 and 2, it can be acknowledged that the above real estate was permitted under the name of the defendant C and D. Thus, the defendant C and D, which are the business permission authority, constitute the possession assistant of the defendant B. Thus, unless the defendant B did not have a legitimate title to occupy the above real estate, the defendant C and D are obligated to leave the above real estate from the owner of the above real estate.

C. According to the conclusion, the lease contract was lawfully terminated, and thus, to the Plaintiff.