1. The defendant

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. 400,000 won and as regards it, June 2017

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant leased and used the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by the Plaintiff, and did not pay KRW 200,000 per month from October 20, 2016.

B. On November 20, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to renew the lease agreement by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 1,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 200,000 (payment on January 20), and the lease period of November 20, 2016 as 12 months from November 20, 2016.

C. The Defendant did not pay a monthly rent to the Plaintiff even after the lease contract was renewed.

[Ground of recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above fact-finding, the lease contract was lawfully terminated on June 2, 2017, which included the Plaintiff’s declaration of intention that “a lease is terminated on the grounds of the Defendant’s default on the payment of rent.”

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff and pay the following money with unjust enrichment equivalent to the overdue charge and the rent.

1) From October 20, 2016 to May 19, 2017, KRW 1,400,000 in arrears (=200,000 x July) to KRW 400,000, excluding KRW 1,000,000 in a lease deposit, and KRW 20,000 in a month from May 20, 2017 to the delivery of the building of this case

B. The Defendant’s assertion on reimbursement 1) The Defendant refused to receive the rent by failing to inform the Plaintiff of the account number to receive the rent, and asserts that the rent in arrears is excessive to KRW 80,000. However, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff intentionally refused to receive the rent or that the Defendant paid the rent in arrears. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion on the claim that the rent should be appropriated from the rent deposit is without merit.