1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff’s “A” each month from September 1, 2015 to the date of completion of delivery of the building indicated in the separate sheet.

Facts of recognition

On July 2, 2003, the plaintiff A is "No. 202 below the real estate stated in the separate sheet."

With respect to 6/10 of the shares, the wife completed the registration of initial ownership relating to 4/10 of the 202 shares, and upon the death of D, Plaintiff A and D inherited their shares on January 3, 2012. On September 1, 201, Plaintiff A and D notified the Defendant of 202, the term of lease from September 1, 201 to August 31, 2013, the term of lease from September 1, 201 to August 31, 2013, the lease contract was concluded between Plaintiff A and D with KRW 90,000,000,000,000 for monthly rent, and KRW 20,000,000,000 for management expenses, and received the lease deposit at around that time. At the same time, Plaintiff A and D refused to accept the lease contract from September 27, 201 to May 21, respectively.

Judgment

According to the above facts, the lease contract 202 was lawfully terminated by exercising the plaintiffs' right to terminate due to the defendant's delinquency in rent, and the lease contract was terminated due to the expiration of the lease term due to the lapse of August 31, 2015.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver 202 to the plaintiffs as a performance of duty to restore following the termination and termination of a lease agreement.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent to the plaintiffs, as it occupies 202 units owned by the plaintiffs without any legal ground, uses and gains from them, and thereby causes damages to the plaintiffs.

Meanwhile, the plaintiffs are those who received the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from March 31, 2015, as stated in the attached list.