1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

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

(b) KRW 3,600,000 and as regards it,

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 29, 2018, the Plaintiff leased (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by him/her (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant, with a deposit of KRW 15,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,200,000 (prepaid payment each month), and the period from June 30, 2018 to June 30, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. The defendant occupies and uses the real estate of this case until now.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6, 13 through 15, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above findings of the determination as to the cause of the claim, since the lease contract of this case terminated upon the expiration of its validity, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff

Since the Defendant occupied and used the instant real estate even after the termination of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant obtained unjust enrichment and thereby incurred losses to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff delay damages calculated at the rate of 12% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from June 30, 2019 to September 29, 2019 (i.e., three months from June 30, 2019 to September 29 x monthly rent 1,200,000) as well as as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from October 12, 2019 to the date of complete payment.

In addition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff unjust enrichment calculated at the rate of KRW 1,200,000 per month from September 30, 2019 to the day when the Plaintiff loses the Plaintiff’s ownership or the Defendant’s possession is terminated. As such, it is anticipated that the Defendant would not fulfill the obligation to return unjust enrichment for which the future due date will come, as the Defendant occupied and used the instant real estate until the day when the argument of the instant case is concluded, but did not pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rental fee, etc.,