1. The Defendants’ respective Plaintiff:

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

(b) 2,000,000 won and its corresponding;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 23, 2012, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendants as KRW 10,000,000 (5,000,000 until November 30, 2012), monthly rent of KRW 500,00 (50,000 until November 30, 2012) (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and thereafter, handed over the said building around that time.

B. The Defendants did not pay monthly rent after January 1, 2014, and the instant complaint stating the Plaintiff’s rescission of the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the delinquency in rent was served on the Defendants on May 26, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the facts found above, the instant lease contract was terminated on May 26, 2014, and thus, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff upon restitution.

B. The Plaintiff entered into the instant lease agreement with the Defendants to receive KRW 500,000 per month as the rent, as seen earlier. The fact that the Defendants occupied the instant building from May 27, 2014, the following day following the cancellation date of the instant lease agreement to July 24, 2014, and used and profit-making the instant building, which the Defendants asserted as the director, does not conflict between the parties, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendants used and profit-making the instant building after July 25, 2014.

Ultimately, the Defendants are obligated to pay each Plaintiff the unpaid rent. From May 27, 2014 to July 24, 2014, the date following the end of the said lease, the Defendants occupied and used the instant building, thereby gaining profits from the use of the building, and thereby making the Plaintiff, the lessor, incur losses equivalent to the amount of the usage profit, thereby returning the said amount to the Plaintiff with unjust enrichment.

(2).