1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. All plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

3. Total costs of litigation are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including branch numbers for those with virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply);

(ii) the entry in Eul evidence No. 12 and the purport of the whole pleadings

A. On February 17, 2016, the Defendant leased the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, KRW 600,000,000,000 for rent, and the lease period from February 17, 2016 to February 17, 2018, the lease period of KRW 168.94,00 square meters for each of the (Ga) parts of (Ga) connecting each of the items of (Ga) 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, and 1,000 square meters in sequence, among the underground floors of the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. The Plaintiffs purchased the instant building from D on June 2, 2016 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 7, 2016 with each 1/2 shares, respectively, and the Defendant and the Plaintiffs decided to succeed to the status of the said lease.

C. From August 2016, the Defendant terminated the instant singinging business on or around January 21, 2017 when the Defendant did not pay rent to the Plaintiffs. On or around April 2017, the Defendant delivered the instant singinging to the Plaintiffs.

On March 28, 2017, the Plaintiffs sent content-certified mail to the Defendant to terminate the lease agreement on the ground of the delinquency in the rent of the instant singing book, and the said content-certified mail reached the Defendant around that time.

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the judgment on the claim for the delivery of the instant singing, the Defendant had already delivered the instant singing to the Plaintiffs, and thus, the claim seeking the delivery of the instant singing room is without merit.

B. According to the above facts, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on March 28, 2017, upon the notice of termination on the grounds of the Defendant’s delay of at least two years, according to the following facts: (i) the commission of the instant singing and the claim for unjust enrichment;

On the other hand, the defendant's contract of this case around January 21, 2017 by the defendant's notification of termination on the ground of the plaintiffs' non-performance of repair obligation.