1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

B. As from April 29, 2020, the delivery of the above building.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 25, 2019, the Plaintiffs concluded a lease agreement between the Defendant and the instant real estate (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”) as the owner of the Gangnam-gu Seoul, and between October 29 and October 29, 2021, which is KRW 30,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,200,000, and the period from October 29, 2019 to October 29, 2021.

B. The Plaintiffs sent each of the following two months of monthly rent to the Defendant (the condition that only KRW 2,200,000 was paid on October 29, 2019 and November 28, 2019), the content certification of February 3, 2020 (the instant lease contract is terminated in the event that the monthly rent is in arrears for two months) and the content certification of February 20, 2020 (the instant lease contract is terminated in the event that the monthly rent is in arrears for two months), and each of the above contents certification was served to the Defendant around that time.

C. On April 18, 2020, the Defendant, prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit, paid 8,800,000 won in total to the Plaintiffs.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3

2. According to the above facts, the lease contract of this case was terminated as the delivery of proof of contents on February 3, 2020, and thus, (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 62Da496, Oct. 11, 1962). The defendant is obligated to pay the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 1,100,000 for each month, which is recognized as unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of this case from April 29, 2020 to the completion date of delivery of the real estate, where the lessor terminates the lease (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 62Da496, Oct. 11, 1962).

3. Conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims are justified.