2017 Maz. 5167549 Maz. (Delivery)

A

1. Korea Trade Commission (hereinafter “Korea Trade Commission”);

2. B regional housing association;

Pleadings without Oral Proceedings

November 24, 2017

1. The Defendants deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate indicated in the attached list.

2. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff.

(a) pay 74,250,000 won and interest thereon at the rate of 15 percent per annum from October 20, 2017 to the date of full payment;

B. From September 1, 2017 to the date on which delivery of the real estate mentioned in paragraph (1) is completed, the amount of money calculated at the rate of 14,850,000 won per month shall be paid.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants.

4. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article may be provisionally executed.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Indication of claim;

The reasons for the attached Form shall be as shown in the attached Form.

2. Applicable provisions;

Judgment without Oral Pleading (Articles 208(3)1 and 257 of the Civil Procedure Act)

Judges Lee Jong-soo

Indication of Real Estate

A person shall be appointed.

Cheongwon of the Gu

1. The relationship between parties;

The plaintiff is the owner of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Do Officetel 201, 202, and 208 (hereinafter referred to as the "real estate of this case") (refer to the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3). The defendant Han FastM is a corporation that operates the execution and construction business (refer to the evidence No. 4). The defendant Eul District Housing Association is a housing association established by the head of Dongjak-gu on October 24, 2008 as a housing association established by the Housing Act (refer to the evidence No. 5). The defendants are the co-residents who leased all of the real estate of this case from the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's right to request the name of the building, rent and unjust enrichment that the plaintiff has against the defendant

(a) Conclusion of a lease agreement;

On November 17, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter referred to as “lease Agreement”) with the Defendants on the instant real estate owned by the Plaintiff: 100,000,000 won: 14,850,000 won (including value added tax) for the instant real estate, and the due date for the payment of rent: 14,850,000 won for each month: the due date for the lease: December 1, 2016; 200,000 from December 1, 2016 to L/C (hereinafter referred to as “this case’s lease agreement”); and on that day, the Defendant B paid 100,000 won for the deposit to the Plaintiff (see evidence 7).

(b) Unpaid rents;

The Defendants did not pay rent from time to time after the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, and did not pay rent of KRW 74,250,000 up to September 1, 2017 as follows (see Evidence A7).

【Adaptable Rent

Terms of 12.01 to 12.016.07 2.07 ; 2.01 to 2016.12.01. 2017.01.01.01 to 2017.01.01.01 to 2017.07.01.01.07 201.07.07.01.07.01.07.07.07.07.07.07.07.07.07.07.07.07.07.07.07.07. 207.07. 14.07. 207.07. 207. 207. 14.07. 207. 207. 14.207.

C. Claim for exclusion of interference based on the ownership of the Defendant by the Plaintiff L (claim for Elimination of Building Name)

B. As indicated in the foregoing paragraph, the Defendants are paying five-year rents to the Plaintiff as of September 1, 2017, and the Defendants are paying five-year rents to the Plaintiff.

In addition, on July 6, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) notified the Defendants that three-year rents have been unpaid; (b) notified the Defendants on July 6, 2017 that the three-year rents have been unpaid; and (c) notified the Defendants that the payment was made by July 14, 2017; and (d) at the time of the cancellation of the unpaid rental agreement; (b) notified the Defendants on July 17, 2017 that the three-year rents have been unpaid; and (c) notified the Defendants on July 31, 2017 that the three-year rents have been paid by July 31, 2017; (d) however, the Defendants did not pay the unpaid rents to the Plaintiff up to now (see subparagraph 9).

In short, the instant lease agreement was canceled due to the Defendants’ failure to pay rent for more than three years (the service of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, which is the service of a copy of the complaint of this case, and re-notifications of the cancellation of the instant lease agreement on the grounds of not less than three years’ rents). Accordingly, the Plaintiff has the right to request the name of the building as the right to request the Defendants not to interfere

D. Rent and claim for unjust enrichment owed by the Plaintiff against the Defendants

B. As seen above, as seen in the foregoing paragraph, the Plaintiff has a claim for rent of KRW 74,250,00 (illegal Enrichment) with the aggregate of the rent for five years unpaid until September 1, 2017 to the Defendants.

In addition, the instant lease agreement is a subsequent rental agreement, and the rent paid on the first day of each month is equivalent to the rent for the previous month, and the Plaintiff has a claim against the Defendants for unjust enrichment at the rate of KRW 14,850,00, which is equivalent to the rent for each month from September 1, 2017 to the delivery date of the real estate stated in the attached Form.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate indicated in the separate sheet according to the Plaintiff’s notice of termination of the contract for the reason of delinquency in payment of three or more periods of rent, and the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the unpaid rent of 74,250,000 won and damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the date of delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case to the day of full payment. In addition, the Defendants jointly and severally are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff unjust enrichment at the rate of 14,850,000 won per month from September 1, 2017 to the date of delivery of the real estate indicated in the separate sheet. The