1.In the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning the designated person shall be modified as follows:

The designated person shall be the plaintiff 27,90.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff leased the instant real estate from Korea, from March 1, 2013 to February 28, 2014, leased the instant real estate to the Defendant (including value-added tax), 5 million won in deposit, and 2750,000 won in rent (including value-added tax).

B. After the expiration of the period of sub-lease by the Defendant, the Plaintiff sub-leaseed the instant real estate to the selector in the re-lease period from August 1, 2013 to July 31, 2014, and 2.5 million won per month (in advance on the second month, 5 million won per one day).

C. The Defendant failed to pay the rent of KRW 13.75 million during the sublease period, and did not pay the public charges of KRW 506,235.

The Selection did not pay the rent that occurred from September 1, 2013, and did not pay 490,617 public charges.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap 1 through 5, and 13 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. 1 Determination as to the cause of the claim 1) Even if a lessee, who had continuously occupied a leased building after the termination of the lease contract, continues to possess it, if he/she did not obtain any profit by failing to use it or make profits from the leased building according to the original purpose of the contract, the obligation to return unjust enrichment therefrom is not established, and this is also true in cases where he/she failed to use or make profits from the leased building due to the lessee’s circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da818, Oct. 12, 2006). While the Claimant asserts that he/she handed over the instant real estate on July 31, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that the Claimant moved out the real estate and delivered the instant real estate on October 2, 2014.

As to the fact that it is difficult to view that the Appointor left the real estate in this case to have used and profit from the real estate in accordance with its original purpose, and otherwise, the Appointor obtained profit from the real estate in this case by using and earning profit from the real estate in accordance with its original purpose after July 31, 2014.