1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) deliver each real estate listed in the separate sheet;

(b) From November 5, 2015:

subsection (b).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 5, 2012, the Plaintiffs concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease the instant real estate at KRW 70,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 450,000 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. At the time of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant paid KRW 50,000,000 to the Plaintiffs as lease deposit, and the Plaintiffs recognized that the lessee of the instant golf driving range received KRW 70,00,000 on the premise that the lease deposit was settled at the time of termination of the lease agreement by reflecting the Defendant’s loss due to customer deposits received from customers.

C. Around that time, the Plaintiffs delivered the instant real estate to the Defendant, and the Defendant is operating a golf range in the instant real estate until the date of closing the argument.

After the conclusion of the lease agreement, the Defendant spent the facility repair cost of the instant golf course, and the Plaintiffs agreed to bear KRW 14,00,000 out of the facility repair cost paid by the Defendant.

E. On June 7, 2012, the Defendant paid KRW 4,500,00 to the Plaintiffs for rent, and thereafter, paid only the following rent of KRW 72,680,70 by October 13, 2014:

F. On October 20, 2014, the Plaintiffs sent a notice to the Defendant that the instant lease contract will be terminated on the grounds of the delinquency in rent for at least two months, which reaches the Defendant around that time.

G. Meanwhile, the Defendant deposited KRW 3,800,000 per month to the Plaintiffs from November 2014 to the date of the closing of the instant argument.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 4 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), witness D's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The issue of whether the Defendant’s delinquency in the rent is the main issue in this case is whether or not the Defendant’s delinquency in the rent. Thus, this part of the issue before examining the validity of the Plaintiffs’ claims is examined.

A. The Parties’ assertion 1.