1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

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

(b) from April 3, 2015, entry in the separate sheet.

Facts of recognition

Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and arguments stated in Gap 1, 2-1-2-3, 3, 4-1, and 4-2, the plaintiff, on October 3, 2010, leased real estate listed in the attached Table to the defendant as lease deposit amounting to KRW 50 million, the lease term from October 3, 2010 to October 2, 2015, and the monthly rent of KRW 4,400,00 (including value-added tax). Since the defendant was in arrears for a four-monthly period from October 2, 2014, the plaintiff can be recognized that the lease contract was terminated on the ground that the rent was overdue for at least two months on October 10, 2014.

According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, since the above lease contract was lawfully terminated by the termination of the plaintiff, the defendant is obligated to deliver the store of this case to its original state, and pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent due to the possession of the store of this case after the unpaid rent and termination of the contract.

As to this, the Defendant paid the unpaid rent of KRW 26.4 million on November 27, 2014, which is after the Plaintiff’s notice of termination, and paid normally the monthly rent of KRW 4.4 million thereafter, the termination of the above lease is unlawful. However, Article 640 of the Civil Act provides that the lessor may terminate the lease when the delayed amount of the lessee reaches the rent of the second period. As such, the lessor’s right to terminate the lease due to the delayed payment for more than two years, and the lessor’s notice of termination at the time of the termination, the above lease is lawfully terminated, and even if the lessor pays the unpaid rent, the lease contract already terminated or the effect of the above termination is not extinguished.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff.

However, the Plaintiff is a person who was fully paid monthly rent from April 2, 2015. Therefore, the Defendant’s unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 4,400,000 per month from April 3, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the instant store.