1. The defendant

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

B. From February 1, 2015, each of the above real estate.

If the purport of the entire argument is added to the statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the plaintiff leased the real estate No. 1 among the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter "each real estate of this case") to the defendant on February 1, 2013 as KRW 20,00,000, KRW 1,650,000, monthly rent (including value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) and KRW 1,650,000, from February 1, 2013 to 36 months. On July 1, 2013, the real estate No. 220,000 among each of the real estate of this case was leased to the plaintiff on July 1, 2013, and the defendant agreed to invalidate the lease of each of the above real estate at the time of delay for more than three months, and the defendant may pay the real estate of this case to the plaintiff for a period of six months or more, barring any special circumstance to the contrary.

In regard to this, the defendant can sufficiently cover the overdue difference in the above deposit that the defendant paid to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant's assertion that the plaintiff's claim cannot be complied with, but the above circumstance cited by the defendant cannot be rejected. Thus, the defendant's above argument is rejected.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver each of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and to pay KRW 1,870,000 per month from February 1, 2015 to the completion of delivery of each of the instant real estate as unjust enrichment (= KRW 1,650,000).

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.