1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate indicated in the attached list, and the said real estate from May 9, 2016.

In full view of the purport of each statement in Gap evidence No. 1 and No. 4, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant on May 7, 2015 with regard to the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the plaintiff (hereinafter the instant officetel), with the lease deposit amount of KRW 5 million, KRW 150,000, KRW 150,000, and the period from May 8, 2015 to KRW 12 months (hereinafter the instant lease agreement). Since the fact that the lease term of this case has expired as of the date of the closing of argument of this case is apparent in fact, the lease of this case terminated on the ground that the term has expired.

(1) The Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant officetel to the Plaintiff and to deliver money equivalent to the monthly rent from May 9, 2016 to the completion date of delivery of the instant officetel, as claimed by the Plaintiff, to the effect that the lessee is not the Defendant, but the actual lessee is C. However, the entries in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 alone are insufficient to support the Defendant’s assertion, and there is no counter-proof.) Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant officetel to the Plaintiff. As requested by the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff money at the rate of KRW 1,150,000 per month as the monthly

The plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.