1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

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

B. 600,000 won and as regards this, June 2017

Facts of recognition

On December 25, 2015, the Plaintiff and C entered into a lease agreement with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”) for the lease period of two years, deposit money of three million won, and rent of KRW 300,000 per month.

On January 1, 2016, the Defendant and C concluded a sublease contract with a deposit of KRW 3,00,000, rent of KRW 300,000 per month, and the lease term of the instant building for three years, and the Plaintiff did not obtain the consent.

The defendant has taken over the above building from C on January 1, 2016 and has possessed it up to the present day.

(Reasons for recognition) Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings.

The sub-lease contract between the plaintiff C and the defendant has no effect on the plaintiff because the plaintiff's consent was not obtained.

Therefore, the Defendant shall deliver the said real estate to the Plaintiff, and pay rent of KRW 600,000 and delay damages therefor from May 1, 2017 to June 30, 2017, and rent of KRW 300,00 per month from July 1, 2017 to the completion of life expectancy.

The Plaintiff’s mother, the actual owner of the instant building, promised that the Defendant “to lease the instant building to the Defendant upon the termination of the dispute over the lease with C.”

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is improper.

Judgment

The Defendant, from January 1, 2016, has occupied the instant building owned by the Plaintiff from around January 1, 2016, and thus, the said building should be transferred to the Plaintiff and the profits from the possession thereof must be returned.

The fact that the Plaintiff’s mother, who is the Plaintiff’s mother on a defense, stated that D would lease the instant building to the Defendant when the dispute with C is terminated is not a dispute between the parties.

However, there is no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the specific term of lease and rent, which is acknowledged based on the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, in other words: