1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around February 2005, the Plaintiffs entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting a deposit amount of KRW 10 million as to the instant housing and KRW 1.4 million as to the instant housing, among the real estate listed in the separate sheet, in which the Plaintiffs owned 1/3 shares, and entered into a new lease agreement with the Defendant on February 2007, by setting the said lease agreement with the Defendant as KRW 10 million and KRW 4 million as to the instant housing (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Around February 2007, the said lease agreement was terminated between the Defendant and the Defendant, and a new lease was concluded by setting the deposit amount of KRW 10 million as to the instant housing and KRW 4 million as monthly (hereinafter “instant lease”).

B. However, the Defendant did not pay a security deposit and rent after the instant lease agreement, and on April 26, 2013, Plaintiff A notified the Defendant to deliver the instant house, and notified the Defendant again on May 13, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, it is reasonable to view that Plaintiff A notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant lease by notifying the Defendant of the delivery of the instant house on April 26, 2013 and May 13, 2013. The instant lease agreement was terminated by the Plaintiff A’s termination notice given on April 26, 2013, on the grounds of the Defendant’s vehicle delay.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant house to the Plaintiffs following the termination of the instant lease agreement to its original state. Since the termination date of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant is obligated to pay the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, calculated at the rate of KRW 400,000 per month from February 28, 2007 to the completion date of delivery of the instant house, as claimed by the Plaintiffs.

The part concerning the claim of KRW 20,000 per month was dismissed in the first instance court, and the plaintiffs are against this part.