1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendants respectively deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

B. The defendant A from January 1, 2018 to the above.

1. Facts of recognition;

(1) On April 14, 2017, Defendant A leased a building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) from the Plaintiff as to KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 3080,00 (including value-added tax), and the lease period from May 1, 2017 to April 30, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and is occupying and using the said building.

d. However, Defendant A had Defendant B operate the licensed real estate agent office in the instant building with the consent of the Plaintiff on the same day.

Secondly, Defendant A did not pay the Plaintiff monthly rent from January 1, 2018. The Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on the ground that the Plaintiff did not pay more than two months of rent.

[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant A: Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the fact that there is no dispute

2. According to the above facts of determination, since the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated, the Plaintiff is obligated to restore the original state to its original state. The Defendants deliver each of the instant building to the Plaintiff, and Defendant A is obligated to return the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 3,080,000 per month from January 1, 2018 to the delivery of the said building with the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent and the rent.

3. According to the conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.