1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Attached Map 1, 2, 3, 4.2, among the real property listed in the separate sheet 202.16 square meters, the real property indicated in the separate sheet 1st;

Basic Facts

A. On January 31, 201, C entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit amounting to KRW 6,000,000 for annual rent of KRW 7,50,000 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) and on January 31, 201, with respect to the portion of KRW 95.36 square meters in the ship (a) connected each point of Section 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, and 1, in sequence with the Defendant on the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”). On January 31, 2012, C entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit amount of KRW 6,00,000 for the leased term of 12 months.

B. On December 2, 2015, the Plaintiff received the instant building from C and completed the registration of ownership transfer, and succeeded to the lessor’s status of the instant lease agreement upon completion of the registration of ownership transfer. On January 31, 2016, the Plaintiff decided to change the annual rent to KRW 8,500,000 with the Defendant on January 31, 2016, and received KRW 8,500,000 from the Defendant on February 3, 2016.

C. On October 19, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant lease contract will not be renewed.

[Ground of recognition] In light of the facts without dispute, the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, and the facts of the determination as to the grounds for the claim as a whole of the pleadings, barring any special circumstance, the lease contract of this case was terminated on January 31, 2017. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the provisional portion of this case to the plaintiff and return the rate of KRW 8,500,000 per annum, which is the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, from February 1, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the provisional portion of this case.

The defendant's argument regarding the defendant's assertion is that the plaintiff could not demand the plaintiff to collect KRW 15,00,000, which is equivalent to at least 90% of the existing rent on a yearly basis, and that the plaintiff could not accept it, and that the plaintiff interfered with the other lessee with an opportunity to recover the premium on the provisional portion of this case. However, the plaintiff's refusal to renew the lease contract of this case and the lease contract of this case has expired, as seen earlier,