1. The Defendants jointly do so to the Plaintiffs:

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

(b) gold 4,400,000; and

If Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including paper numbers) added the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts are as follows: ① The plaintiffs (representative A) who are 1/2 equity right holders of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as "real estate of this case") concluded a lease contract with the defendants around October 30, 2018, with the lease deposit of 10,000,000, monthly rent of 1,000,000 (Additional Tax), and the lease period of 48 months from November 1, 2018 to October 31, 2022 (hereinafter "the lease contract of this case"). ② The defendants paid rent only from March 2, 2019 to June 4, 2019 to June 30, 2019; ④ The defendants notified the defendants of the termination of the lease contract of this case to the defendants of this case (including additional tax 20,000,000 won).

I would like to say.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendants are jointly obligated to jointly deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiffs, and to pay the amount of KRW 1,100,000 per month from July 2019 to the completion date of delivery of the instant real estate by unjust enrichment.

Defendant D, upon agreement with the Plaintiffs on May 2019, completed the settlement of the monthly rent of KRW 1/2,300,000, the monthly share of KRW 3,300,000, which is one of its own share under the instant lease agreement, and delivered its own share, and accordingly, Defendant D alleged that the remaining portion of the deposit should be paid KRW 4,90,000,000, which remains from the Plaintiffs, is insufficient to acknowledge that the settlement was made as above with the agreement with the Plaintiffs, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, Defendant D still has the duty to be a joint lessee of the instant lease agreement.