1. The Defendants are paid KRW 5,64,517 from the Plaintiff, and at the same time, set forth in attached Table 2 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on November 23, 2009 with respect to the real estate stated in attached list No. 1.

B. On January 21, 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with Defendant C on the real estate listed in attached Table 2 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) as part of the real estate listed in attached Table 1 attached hereto (hereinafter “instant building”), and agreed with Defendant C as of February 5, 2014, the deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 100,000, monthly rent of KRW 100,000, and period of lease.

C. Defendant C paid a security deposit to the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant lease agreement, and the lease contract was renewed with the Plaintiff after the said lease term expires.

On January 5, 2016, Defendant B obtained consent from the Plaintiff to take over the lessee status of the instant lease from Defendant C, and agreed between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff as KRW 1,00,000 on the monthly rent from January 6, 2016 to February 6, 2017.

E. Until April 3, 2017, the Defendants operated sales business in remote areas and remodelling interior fisheries in the instant building; from the following day, the Defendants did not operate a business in a state where locking devices were installed without leaving only part of the goods in the instant building.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the claim for delivery of a building, since the lease contract of this case is recognized to have expired, the defendants are obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner of the building of this case, and to implement the balance of the deposit (However, the scope of the deposit is examined in paragraph (3)) from the plaintiff as requested by the plaintiff.

3. Scope of the deposit to be returned.

A. According to the purport of the entire statement and pleading of No. 3 and No. 4 regarding overdue rent and unjust enrichment equivalent to rent in arrears.