1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 1, 2015, the Plaintiff, among real estate listed in the attached list, leased approximately KRW 1,00,000, KRW 40,000 for lease deposit, and the lease period from December 1, 2015 to November 30, 2016, with the Defendant, approximately KRW 153.86,00 square meters for (a), (b) part of (a), (b), and (c) of the real estate listed in the attached list, connected in sequence 1,22,3,4, 5,6, and 153.86 square meters for each of the following items (hereinafter “instant building”).

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The defendant did not pay the rent to the plaintiff from February 1, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) According to the facts of the determination on the claim for extradition of real estate, the instant lease agreement was terminated on November 30, 2016, and thus, the validity of the instant lease agreement was terminated (the Plaintiff asserted that the instant lease was terminated by the delivery of a copy of the complaint in the instant case, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the instant lease agreement was renewed without termination after the expiration of the period, it shall be deemed that the instant lease was terminated by the expiration of the period, not by the termination of the contract.

(2) According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff. 2) According to the above facts, the defendant does not pay the rent from February 1, 2016, and uses and benefits from the possession of the building of this case. Thus, in a case where the lessee occupies and uses and benefits from the building of this case after the termination of the lease, the defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated at the rate of KRW 400,000 per month from February 1, 2016 to the day the delivery of the building of this case is completed. (b) The defendant's argument 1) is asserted in the lease contract of this case.