1. The Defendants shall deliver to the Plaintiff three-story general restaurants of 316.02 square meters among the buildings indicated in the indication of the attached building.

2...

1. Following the facts of recognition are without dispute between the Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C, and the Plaintiff and Defendant D may be acknowledged by taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as a whole in each of the statements in subparagraphs A through 4, and Nos. 5-1 through 7.

On October 22, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendants, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,430,000 (including value-added tax) on the third floor general restaurant 316.02 square meters (hereinafter “instant building”) among the buildings indicated in the indication of the attached building owned by the Plaintiff.

At the time, the Defendants agreed to pay the monthly rent in advance from January 25, 2014.

B. The Defendants paid KRW 10,000,000 as the deposit for lease until October 29, 2013, and occupied and used the instant building.

C. After that, the Defendants did not pay monthly taxes from November 25, 2014, and did not pay KRW 2,400,619, such as water rates and electricity rates.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff notified the Defendants of the intent to terminate the above lease agreement on the ground that the service of the duplicate of the complaint in this case was in arrears.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the above lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants terminated upon the lawful termination of the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, and the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay the amount of monthly rent calculated at the rate of KRW 1,430,000 per month from May 11, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the instant building.

B. (1) On February 2015, the Plaintiff’s summary of the argument regarding Defendant D’s assertion was based on a notarial deed drawn up as a false patrol officer on February 2, 2015, and obstructed the business by executing the seizure of corporeal movables in the instant building.

Defendant D shall pay the sum of KRW 4,290,00 and public charges of KRW 2,400,639 for three-months before the Plaintiff interfered with the business as above and KRW 6,690,639.