(a) Of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, each point in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1;

A. On May 1, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract with the Defendant and the Plaintiff on the part (A) part (a) of 98.28 square meters in the ship connected in sequence with each point of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 of the attached drawings among the real estate listed in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) and leased the instant commercial building to the Defendant, for a lease period of 2 years, and for a rent of 1.3 million won per month (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

B. From February 1, 2016, the Defendant did not pay rent to the present day, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant lease agreement on October 5, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 to 4, Eul evidence 1 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the fact that the lease contract is terminated and the duty to restore is recognized, since the lease contract of this case terminated as the Defendant’s overdue charge around October 5, 2016, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the commercial building of this case to the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the rent or the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent of KRW 1.3 million from February 1, 2016 to the completion date of delivery of the commercial building of this case.

B. The plaintiff's ground for judgment as to the defendant's assertion 1 is that the plaintiff did not pay rent because the tenant of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of this case caused conflicts, such as arbitrarily loading building materials and parking a vehicle on the front end of the building of this case, and requesting the plaintiff to resolve the conflict. Thus, the plaintiff's claim that the lease contract of this case cannot be terminated.

On the other hand, the defendant's obligation to pay the rent is not suspended or exempted solely for the reasons alleged by the defendant, and according to the Gap evidence No. 4, the conflict between the plaintiff and the lessee of the adjacent building has already been reached by separating the boundaries between the defendant and the lessee of the adjacent building.