1. The Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to provide real estate indicated in the attached list, and the said real estate from May 29, 2016.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statement and arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant on June 18, 2014 with the condition that the plaintiff shall lease the real estate indicated in the order of the plaintiff (hereinafter "the real estate of this case"), KRW 20 million per month, KRW 2 million per month, and the term of the lease from June 30, 2014 to June 30, 2015 (hereinafter "the lease agreement of this case"). The defendant delayed the payment of the rent several times and delayed payment to the plaintiff on March 2, 2015, but the lease agreement of this case was renewed once again, and the plaintiff did not deliver the real estate of this case to the defendant on September 11, 2015, and thus, the defendant did not deliver the real estate of this case to the defendant until June 20, 2015, and thus, the defendant was able to acknowledge the non-payment of this case's lease agreement of this case.

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to deem that the instant lease contract was terminated due to the Defendant’s delinquency in rent, barring any other special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and to pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated by the ratio of KRW 2 million per month from May 29, 2016 to the date the delivery of the said real estate is completed.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and accepted.