The defendant delivers the real estate indicated in the attached list to the plaintiff, and deliver the above real estate from May 29, 2013.

Facts of recognition

On October 5, 2012, the Plaintiff leased the real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant with the lease deposit of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 800,000 (after October 29, 2012), and the lease term of KRW 29,000,00, from October 29, 2012 to October 28, 2014.

However, as the Defendant delayed to pay the rent after May 29, 2013, around November 4, 2013, the original Defendant added a special clause stating that “The deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000 from June 2013, and monthly rent of KRW 900,000,00,” and that “if the Defendant completely pays the unpaid rent, it shall be reinstated to the original contractual terms.”

hereinafter referred to as the "instant special agreement"

(2) Inasmuch as the Defendant did not pay the instant rent, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to pay the overdue rent to the Defendant around October 27, 2014, which was the time following the expiration of the instant lease term, on or before November 29, 2014, but the Defendant did not comply therewith. On this ground, the instant complaint seeking the termination of the instant lease contract was served on the Defendant. [The instant complaint was served on the Defendant for the following reasons: (a) according to the fact that there was no dispute over the grounds for recognition; (b) the entry of the evidence No. 1 and No. 3; (c) the apparent fact in the record; and (d) the purport of the entire pleadings as to the grounds for the claim, the instant lease contract was lawfully terminated by the delivery of the instant complaint; and therefore, (c) the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff; and (d) pay the money calculated by the ratio of KRW 900,000 per month corresponding to the said rent, as unjust enrichment from May 29, 2013

The defendant's assertion is alleged to the purport that there is no overdue difference by the agreement to deduct the monthly rent from the lease deposit at the time of the instant special agreement, but there is no evidence to acknowledge such agreement. Therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

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