1. From 10,00,000 won to 10,000 won, Defendant C shall each month from September 24, 2013 to the completion date of the delivery of real estate indicated in the separate sheet.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 16, 2012, Plaintiff A leased the instant officetel to Defendant C with the following content:

Deposit: Amount of KRW 10,000: Period of KRW 950,000 per month (prepaid, payment on June 24: 12 months from June 24, 2012

B. From September 24, 2013, Defendant C did not pay the tea.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the request for extradition

A. According to the above facts, since the instant lease agreement was terminated on November 19, 2013, which was served on the Defendant C by the instant complaint containing a declaration of intent to terminate the lease agreement on the grounds of the delinquency in payment of rent for at least two years, Defendant C is obligated to deliver the instant officetel to the Plaintiff.

On the other hand, as the lease contract of this case was terminated, the plaintiff A shall return to the defendant C the remainder after deducting the overdue rent and unjust enrichment equivalent to the overdue rent from the lease deposit, and the duty to deliver the officetel and the duty to return the deposit simultaneously.

B. Ultimately, Defendant C is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder after deducting the overdue rent of KRW 950,00 per month or the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from KRW 10,000 to KRW 10,000 from September 24, 2013 until the completion date of delivery of the instant officetel from KRW 950,000.

C. The Plaintiff A’s request for extradition is reasonable to the extent of the above recognition.

3. The evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiffs suffered emotional distress due to the defendants' illegal acts, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

The plaintiffs' claims for this part shall not be accepted.

4. Conclusion, part of the claim for extradition against Defendant A by Plaintiff A is accepted.