1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Attached Form 2, Section 1, 2, 3.0 among the fourth floor of the building on which indication of the attached real estate was stated.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 1, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”) with respect to approximately 59.5 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant leased portion”) on the fourth floor of the instant building, on the part of approximately 59.5 square meters (title D; hereinafter referred to as “the instant leased portion”) connected each of the items in sequence with the Defendant, among the fourth floor of the said building, as the owner of the building indicating the attached real estate 1, under which the lease agreement was entered into between March 17, 2016 and March 16, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “the instant lease agreement”). On March 17, 2016, the Plaintiff delivered the leased portion to the Defendant on March 17, 2016.

B. From April 17, 2016, the Defendant delayed the payment of rent under the instant lease agreement. From the commencement date of the instant lease agreement to the date of the closing of argument, the Defendant paid KRW 8,570,000 in total to the Plaintiff under the instant lease agreement (i.e., KRW 500,000 as of March 14, 2016, KRW 750,000 as of March 16, 2016, KRW 60,000 as of June 20, 2016, KRW 500,000 as of June 20, 2016, KRW 60,000 as of June 23, 2017; KRW 1,000,000 as of August 28, 2017; KRW 10,000 as of September 10, 2017; KRW 10,000, Oct. 30, 2017>

C. On February 27, 2019, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail containing the purport that the instant lease agreement will be terminated due to the unpaid rent, and the said content-certified mail reached the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated around February 27, 2019 by the Plaintiff’s notice of termination, which was based on the Defendant’s two or more years of delay of rent.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant delivered the leased portion of this case to the Plaintiff upon termination of the instant lease agreement to its original state. Unless there are special circumstances, the Defendant’s unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent and rent until the delivery of the leased portion is completed.