1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff all the first floor of the real estate stated in the separate sheet, and from February 1, 2014, the said real estate is the same.

1. The Plaintiff seeking a delivery of real estate and a payment of overdue rent or unjust enrichment following the termination of a lease agreement on the grounds of overdue delay from February 1, 2014 by the Defendant.

On April 30, 201, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant at KRW 20 million, monthly rent, KRW 2,057,00 (the amount included in value-added tax 187,00). At the time of the said lease agreement, the said lease agreement was automatically terminated if the Defendant was in arrears for more than three months at the time of the said lease agreement, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the said lease agreement on the grounds of the rent delay around October 20, 2014, or can be recognized by comprehensively taking into account all the descriptions and arguments described in the separate sheet and arguments described in the separate sheet between the parties, or by taking into account the following facts.

Therefore, the above lease contract was automatically terminated due to the Defendant’s delay of rent for more than three months, or it was lawfully terminated due to the Plaintiff’s notice of termination around October 20, 2014, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent or rent from February 1, 2014, on which the foregoing delay in rent occurred until the delivery of the said real estate is completed.

2. The Defendant’s assertion is alleged to the effect that the Defendant did not delay the rent of the above lease contract for not less than three months, but there is no proof as to the fact that the Defendant paid the rent for the period from February 1, 2014. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim is justified.