1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

(b) KRW 1,800,000 and as regards this,

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 9, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 5,00,000, KRW 450,000 per month of rent, and the term of lease from November 1, 2014 to November 1, 2016.

B. Since then, the instant lease agreement was renewed, and the Defendant did not pay up to now the rent as stipulated in the instant lease agreement after having been in arrears as of April 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 3-1 to 33, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the defendant did not pay two or more times the rent stipulated in the instant lease agreement, and it is evident that the duplicate of the complaint of this case, which included an expression of termination of the instant lease agreement on September 8, 2017, was served on the defendant on the grounds of the above delinquency in rent, was served on September 8, 2017. It is reasonable to deem that the instant lease agreement was terminated due to the plaintiff's expression of intent to terminate

B. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, and pay the Plaintiff the sum of the overdue rent of KRW 1,800,000 from April 2017 to July 2017 (=4 months x 450,000) and the unjust enrichment of KRW 450,000 per month from August 2, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the instant building.

C. Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is justified.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.