1. The Defendants deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2. Defendant B shall be the Plaintiff 34,500.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 11, 2012, the Plaintiff leased the real estate indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant store”) to Nonparty D, and Defendant B succeeded to the lessee status of the lease on or around July 2012, and thereby, KRW 50,000 per month for lease deposit and KRW 2,50,000 per month for rent (hereinafter “instant lease”) (i.e., the lease term from April 11, 2012 to April 10, 2014).

B) The Defendant B entered into the instant store. While engaging in the restaurant business with the trade name “E” at the instant store, Defendant B did not pay KRW 34,000,000 from November 201 to April 10, 2014. (c) On August 16, 2013, the Plaintiff served with Defendant B with a content-certified mail, stating that “the instant lease is terminated on the ground of Defendant B’s rent delay.” On April 15, 2014, Defendant B and the instant store jointly occupied the instant store. Meanwhile, Defendant B and the instant store jointly occupied the instant store.

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the lease of this case was terminated by the service of content-certified mail on the ground of Defendant B’s rent delay.

I would like to say.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff, and Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to KRW 2,750,00 per month for the return of the rent-based unjust enrichment from April 11, 2014 to the delivery date of the instant store ( KRW 2,50,000,000, value added tax of KRW 250,000) with the return of the rent-based unjust enrichment from April 11, 2014 to the delivery date of the instant store.

3. The plaintiff's claim is justified.