1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

(b) As from February 1, 2018, KRW 8,000,00 and above.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 27, 2014, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant store”) to the Defendant as KRW 25 million and monthly rent of KRW 20 million.

B. However, as the Defendant did not pay rent from August 1, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for the delivery of a building with Seoul Eastern District Court 2017dan10430, and the said court on July 17, 2017 decided to recommend reconciliation that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 26 million until September 30, 2017, and if the Defendant does not pay the said money by the said payment date, the Defendant shall deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff,” the said decision was finalized around that time.

C. After that, the Defendant paid KRW 26 million to the Plaintiff on September 29, 2017, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant paid KRW 25 million to the Plaintiff on October 26, 2017, with the deposit amount of KRW 25 million and monthly rent of KRW 2 million as of October 26, 2017, and with the lease period of KRW 26 million as of September 1, 2017, the deposit amount of KRW 26 million was appropriated to the smuggling by August 31, 2017, and paid the deposit amount from September 1, 2017.

From September 1, 2019, the term “instant lease agreement” was determined from the point of time to September 1, 2019, and if the Defendant is in arrears on at least three occasions, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the effect that the contract may be terminated (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

On January 25, 2018, the Defendant did not pay monthly rent, except for the Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 2 million. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit by declaring that the instant lease contract is terminated on the ground that the Defendant did not pay rent more than three occasions.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the instant lease contract was lawfully rescinded by the Plaintiff’s declaration of termination on the grounds of the Defendant’s delay at least three occasions, and the Defendant delivered the instant store to the Plaintiff, and the overdue charge of KRW 8 million (=10 million from September 1, 2017 to January 31, 208).