1. The defendant is against the plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party D:

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the attached list of real estate;

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointor concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease from July 23, 2018 to Nov. 28, 2020 (hereinafter “instant building”). As to the building indicated in the real estate list with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant building”), KRW 2.5 million, annual rent of KRW 2.4 million, annual rent of KRW 2.4 million (payment within seven days after the completion of approval for use, and the rent of KRW 1 is paid in advance for the monthly rent of rent, monthly rent of KRW 1), the lease term from November 29, 2018 to November 28, 2020 (hereinafter “the date following the date of approval for use”), the Plaintiff was unable to receive notice from the Defendant on Nov. 28, 2018, and the Plaintiff was occupied by the Defendant on Oct. 28, 2018.

According to the above facts, since the contract of this case was terminated on the ground of the defendant's delinquency in rent, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, and the defendant is obligated to pay the rent of this case and unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of 2,00,000 won per month from November 29, 2018 to the completion date of delivery of the building of this case.

As to this, the defendant argued to the effect that the termination of the contract of this case is without merit, since the defendant agreed to substitute the deposit as the annual rate, but there is no evidence to prove that the contract of this case was terminated, the above argument of the defendant is without merit.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted for the reasons and it is so decided as per Disposition.