1. As to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B is the first floor of Boyang-gu Manan-si D, 5-dong reinforced concrete structure slive roof.

1. On October 26, 2016, the lower court determined as follows: (a) on October 26, 2016, Defendant B, as the owner of the 346.08 square meters in a market of the Mayang-gu, Manyang-gu, Manyang-si, 5 Dong reinforced concrete structure Mabromo-do (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

On January 30, 2017, the real estate stated in paragraph (1) was leased as KRW 3 million, monthly rent of KRW 3.5 million, and on January 30, 2017, the order No. 1-B of the instant real estate was issued to Defendant C.

The real estate mentioned in the subsection was leased as KRW 1.5 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.80,000,000.

From October 2016, Defendant B did not pay the rent from April 2017 to Defendant C, and Defendant C terminated each of the above lease agreements with the Defendants on the ground of the foregoing rent delay on June 2017.

On the other hand, on August 8, 2017, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor purchased the instant real estate from Jinjin Co., Ltd. and completed the registration of transfer.

[Ground for recognition] The intervenor succeeding to the plaintiff and the defendant B: The intervenor succeeding to the plaintiff and the defendant C who succeeded to the confession: There is no dispute, the entries in Gap 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the defendant B-A, who acquired the ownership of the real estate of this case, to the plaintiff succeeding intervenor.

From August 9, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the above real estate, Defendant C is obligated to deliver unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 350,000 per month, and Defendant C is subject to Disposition 1-B.

From December 12, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the above real estate, it is obligated to pay the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 180,000 per month.

3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor’s claim of this case against the Defendants is justified.