1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendants jointly deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. Defendant B shall start on June 7, 2017.

1. Facts of premise;

A. On June 4, 2016, the Plaintiff leased the instant apartment owned by the Plaintiff to Defendant B in advance with the payment of KRW 50,000,000 in annual rent without a lease deposit, and the lease term is one year from June 7, 2016.

B. Around that time, the Plaintiff received a prior payment for the annual rent and delivered the said apartment to Defendant B, and the said lease was implicitly renewed thereafter, and Defendant B paid 10,000,000 won out of the annual rent on June 7, 2017 and did not pay the remainder.

C. Meanwhile, Defendant C, as the father of Defendant B, occupied the apartment of this case with Defendant B, who is the lessee, and argued that he is the lessee, and refused the Plaintiff’s request for extradition.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 3 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. (i) The Plaintiff’s assertion (i.e., the Plaintiff terminated the lease agreement on the grounds of deferred rent arrears by serving a duplicate of the complaint of this case, and seek the delivery of the apartment of this case and the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent.

B. The Defendants asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff’s other apartment units owned by the Plaintiff intended to purchase the apartment units as the same structure as the instant apartment units, but failed to transfer the furniture, etc. due to a change in the actual structure. On June 7, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff as part of the rent of the instant apartment units.

B. The lease contract was lawfully terminated as long as it is evident in the record that the copy of the complaint of this case containing the Plaintiff’s declaration of intention to terminate the lease on the ground of Defendant B’s delinquency in the annual rent of rent was delivered to Defendant B on September 20, 2017.

Therefore, in the premise facts, the Defendants, a co-owner of the instant apartment, are obligated to deliver the said apartment to the Plaintiff on the grounds of the termination of the lease, and the Defendant C is obligated to deliver the said apartment on the grounds of an unauthorized occupation. The circumstance alleged by the Defendants alone is the Plaintiff.