1.(a)

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is from 3,000,000 to 3,000 won from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) on May 10, 2017 to 200.

Facts of recognition

On June 23, 2016, the Plaintiff agreed to the Defendant that the lease contract may be terminated if the lease contract is overdue for at least two months (hereinafter referred to as “the lease contract in this case”) after setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 3 million, KRW 200,000 per month, and the lease term of KRW 1,000 from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017.

On June 24, 2016, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 to the account stipulated in the instant lease agreement, and KRW 3 million,000,000,000 to July 1, 2016, as the lease deposit.

The Defendant received the instant building and used it until January 2017, paid the Plaintiff the rent to the said account, and did not pay the rent thereafter. The payment of the unpaid rent of KRW 500,000 on May 30, 2017, and KRW 600,000 on July 11, 2017, to the extent that it was paid up to April 2017.

After the instant lease agreement, the Defendant continued to pay management expenses up to September 2016 to the C Building Management Office managing the instant building, and paid KRW 170,000 as the unpaid management expenses on October 2016, 2016, the first installment of January 2017, the first installment of February 2017, and the first installment of March 2017, and the second installment of May 2017.

On the other hand, on April 19, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 4,532,080 to the C Building Management Office for the aggregate of management expenses from October 2016, 2016, January 2, 2017, February 2017, March 2017, and from May 2017 to March 2018.

[Grounds for recognition] According to the facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4 through 7 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, and the whole purport of the pleadings, and the facts of the recognition of the above claim for delivery of judgment as to the claim for the principal claim for restitution of rent or unjust enrichment, the defendant delayed to pay for more than two years as stipulated in the lease agreement of this case, and on this ground, the lease of this case is legitimate by the plaintiff'