1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

A. Of the buildings indicated in the attached list, the name of 164.33 square meters on one floor and 163.08 square meters on two floors shall be placed, and B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 12, 2011, the Defendant leased the lease deposit amount of KRW 30,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,000,000, and the lease period of KRW 2,00,00,00 from D from July 26, 201 to July 25, 2013.

B. On December 28, 201, the Plaintiffs purchased the instant building from D and completed the registration of ownership transfer on one half of each of the instant building’s respective shares, and succeeded to a lease agreement with the Defendant.

C. From January 2013, the Defendant delayed the payment of monthly rent, and on August 21, 2014, the Plaintiffs notified the Defendant of the termination of the lease contract by content-certified mail. The above content-certification reached the Defendant around that time.

The lease deposit paid by the Defendant was fully deducted from the overdue rent until October 31, 2014.

E. On the other hand, the Defendant did not request the Plaintiffs to return the premium by keeping the goods on the leased part of the instant case as they were and providing corrective devices.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the lease contract of this case was terminated by the Plaintiff’s exercise of the Plaintiff’s right to terminate the lease contract of this case on August 21, 2014, and the Defendant is obliged to order the Plaintiffs to the leased part of the building of this case and pay the amount equivalent to KRW 2,00,000 per month, which is the monthly rent from November 1, 2014 to the completion date of the name of the leased part of this case from November 1, 2014.

3. The defendant's assertion and judgment on this issue were made with the owner of the entire building and the owner of the building, and since the plaintiffs succeeded to the lease contract as it is, the plaintiffs should return it to the defendant.