1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver (attached Form) real estate listed in the list;

B. From August 3, 2019, KRW 3.6 million and the foregoing.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 2, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the real estate listed in the list (attached Form) (hereinafter “instant real estate”), setting the lease deposit as KRW 60 million, KRW 100,000 per month, and the lease term as from May 2, 2016 to May 2, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff a rent of KRW 100,00,000 on June 2, 2016, and KRW 200,000 on October 11, 2016, respectively, and continued to delay the payment.

C. On July 4, 2018, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail indicating that the instant lease contract is terminated on the grounds of the delinquency in rent.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry in Gap evidence 1-6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above findings of the determination, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant was in arrears with two or more different occasions, and that the content-certified mail containing the Plaintiff’s declaration of termination was delivered to the Defendant around July 4, 2018, which was the date of delivery, due to the lack of evidence that there was no return of the content-certified mail containing the Plaintiff’s declaration of termination (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Da20052, Oct. 27, 200). Accordingly, the instant lease was lawfully terminated pursuant to Article 640 of the Civil

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and pay 3.6 million won [=39 months + KRW 100,000 per month - 300,000 per month] to the Plaintiff, and to pay unjust enrichment calculated by the ratio of KRW 100,00 per month from August 3, 2019 to the completion date of delivery of the instant real estate from August 2, 2019 to August 2, 2019.

(3) The plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the court below, since the defendant refused to deliver the real estate of this case, it is necessary to claim in advance unjust enrichment arising after the date of closing argument.