1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver 93.8 square meters per floor among the buildings listed in the attached list;

B. From April 16, 2017, as above.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 16, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with regard to KRW 10,000,000 for security deposit, monthly rent of KRW 1,200,00 for 1st and 24 months from the 30th of the same month.

B. The above lease agreement contains the following: “The Defendant shall restore the instant building to its original state at the time of the termination of the above lease agreement and return it to the Plaintiff (Article 5); and the Plaintiff shall not participate in the premium for facilities; and the Defendant shall not demand the Plaintiff to make an investment in facilities.”

C. However, from July 2016 to March 3, 2016, the Defendant delayed payment of monthly rent, and the Plaintiff notified the termination of the said lease by serving the written complaint on the Plaintiff.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleading

2. According to the facts found in the judgment on the cause of the claim, the above lease contract was lawfully terminated due to the Defendant’s delinquency in paying monthly rent, and the Defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the Plaintiff, and pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent of KRW 1,200,000 calculated from April 16, 2017 to the completion of delivery of the building of this case.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to this, the Defendant asserted that at the time of the above lease agreement, he provided the Plaintiff with KRW 5,00,000 as the premium, and that the Plaintiff agreed to return the premium when the lease agreement is terminated, and sought the return of the premium pursuant to the above agreement.

No evidence exists to acknowledge that the Defendant paid the said money as premium, and rather, the Plaintiff agreed not to participate in the premium for the instant building in the said lease agreement as seen earlier. Therefore, this part of the allegation is without any need to decide on any other point.