1. The defendant against the plaintiffs

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the annex;

B. From August 10, 2015, the above-mentioned A

(b) buildings;

1.Recognition

A. From around 2002 to April 9, 2013, the Defendant leased the building owned by the Plaintiff B (hereinafter “instant building”) as the wife of the Plaintiff A from the Plaintiffs, and occupied and used the instant building by renewal.

B. On April 10, 2013, the Plaintiffs are the instant lease agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant: (a) the Defendant’s lease deposit of the instant building KRW 70 million; (b) KRW 2.6 million per month; (c) the lease period of KRW 2.6 million per month; and (d) the lease agreement between April 10, 2013 and April 10, 2016.

AB concluded the agreement.

C. Article 5 of the lease contract of this case provides that "The lessee may remodel or alter the lease contract of this case with the approval of the lessor, but the lessee will restore the lease to its original state at the expense of the lessee prior to the date of return of the real estate."

From May 10, 2013 to the date of the closing of argument in this case, the Defendant occupied and used the instant building without paying the Plaintiffs the rent stipulated in the instant lease agreement.

E. The Plaintiffs expressed their intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on March 6, 2015 through the Defendant’s motion for modification of the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim as of March 6, 2015, and the Defendant’s motion for modification of the purport of the instant lease and the cause of the claim reached the Defendant on March 11, 2015.

F. The Plaintiff changed or removed the structure or facilities of the building of this case during the lease period, and the cost necessary for restoring the building to its original state is KRW 29,050,880.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry, including Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 3, appraiser D's appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the facts of recognition of Paragraph 1, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated based on the plaintiffs' declaration of intention to terminate the lease agreement on the grounds of more than two years of rent, and the defendant occupied the instant building.