1. The defendant

A. Upon receiving KRW 20,000,000 from the Plaintiff, the real estate indicated in the attached Table shall be paid to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 9, 2009, the Plaintiff: (a) leased the instant real estate to the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 10 million; (b) monthly rent of KRW 1.3 million; and (c) the lease period from October 9, 2009 to October 8, 201; (b) on October 9, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to lease the instant real estate with a deposit of KRW 10 million; (c) monthly rent of KRW 110,000 (payment on October 9, 201); and (d) from October 9, 201 to October 8, 2013, the lease period was implicitly renewed and extended to October 8, 2015.

(hereinafter referred to as the above, the lease contract between the original defendant finally renewed is called the “instant lease contract.”

On July 20, 2015, the Plaintiff had no idea to maintain the instant lease agreement to the Defendant. As such, the Plaintiff sent notice demanding the Defendant to deliver the instant real estate by October 8, 2015, which is the expiration date of the lease term.

C. The Defendant occupied and used the instant real estate until now, and paid 1.1 million won per month to the Plaintiff by December 9, 2016 without delay.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 3 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, Eul 11 evidence, Eul 12 evidence, Eul 14 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was terminated on October 8, 2015, and barring any special circumstance, 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 rate of KRW 1.1 million per month from January 10, 2017 to the delivery date of the instant real estate.

(3) The Plaintiff claimed the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from the day after the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case, but the Defendant paid 1.1 million won per month to the Plaintiff by December 9, 2016, as seen earlier, the Defendant’s claim on this part is without merit).

A. On October 5, 2015, the Defendant is the Plaintiff and the tea.