1. From Oct. 24, 2014 to Oct. 24, 2014, the Defendant indicated the attached Form Nos. 1 and 1.

On September 19, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 5 million and KRW 300,000,000 per month (payment date), and agreed to increase the rent of KRW 320,000 per month around December 2013. The Defendant began to reside in the above real estate from September 23, 201 after the above lease agreement and delayed the rent from October 2013. The Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the above lease agreement on June 27, 2014 on the ground that the rent of KRW 33,00,000 was delayed as of October 23, 201, or that the Defendant’s delay in rent of KRW 3,30,00 per month is not disputed between the parties, or that the purport of each of subparagraphs 1 through 4 is recognized in full view of all the arguments stated therein.

According to the above facts, the above lease contract between the plaintiff and the defendant was lawfully terminated by the plaintiff's notice of termination as of June 27, 2014, on the ground of the defendant's tea.

As such, the Defendant is obligated to receive money from the Plaintiff from the Plaintiff after deducting the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated by the rate of KRW 320,000 per month from October 24, 2014 to the date of delivery of real estate as of October 23, 2014, from the remaining deposit of KRW 1.7 million ( KRW 5 million-3.3 million) to the Plaintiff.

On the other hand, the defendant asserted that the rent increase cannot be deemed to have been unilaterally made by the plaintiff on or around December 2013, but the defendant also paid the increased rent several times in light of the fact that the defendant paid the increased rent, etc.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.