1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of a multi-family house (hereinafter “multi-family house in this case”) containing 301 units (hereinafter “instant 301 units”) among the real estate stated in the attached Form.

B. On December 16, 2015, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with the lessor, lessee, lease deposit amounting to KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 130,000,000, and from February 10, 2016 to February 10, 2017, regarding the instant subparagraph 301 as a broker of the D Licensed Real Estate Agent Office operated by C.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). C.

On February 10, 2016, the Defendant occupied and used No. 301 until December 26, 2016 to the Plaintiff. D.

On December 29, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with a monthly rent of 2.80,000 won as to the instant multi-family house 203, and entered into a lease agreement with a monthly rent of 2.8 million won as to the instant multi-family house 207 on January 19, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 9, 10 (including branch numbers), the video and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff did not confer the right of representation to the Plaintiff C to conclude the instant lease agreement with respect to 301, and there is no justifiable ground to believe that the Defendant had the right of representation to conclude the instant lease agreement with C. Thus, the instant lease agreement has no effect against the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from February 10, 2016 to December 26, 2016 without legitimate authority.

B. The Defendant concluded a lease agreement with the Plaintiff on the instant 301, upon which the right to represent the Plaintiff to enter into the lease agreement, and paid KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff, and delivered the instant 301 on December 26, 2016.

Even to C, this case.