1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

(b) pay 9,200,000 won;

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 1, 2010, the Plaintiffs leased to D the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by the Plaintiffs as KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent 1,100,000 (Provided, That the period of three months after the contract shall be KRW 1,000,000, and the deposit shall be increased to KRW 10,000,000, or KRW 1,100,000, monthly rent shall be paid thereafter) and the lease period shall be determined from January 1, 2010 to January 31, 2012.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant lease agreement”). (b)

D and E, a partner, operated a traditional tea house in the instant building, and did not pay for the tea due to difficulties in operation. Ultimately, around July 201, they decided to dispose of a teahouse in otherhouse, and obtained the Plaintiffs’ consent to extension of the rental period and sub-leases, and concluded a sub-lease contract with the Defendant on August 1, 201, with the following contents:

(hereinafter referred to as “instant sublease contract”). Deposit: 21,00,000 won: From August 1, 201 to July 31, 2012, the rent of KRW 800,000 shall be paid monthly from August 1, 201 to July 31, 2012 to July 31, 2013 by means of remitting the rent of KRW 1,00,000 to the Busan Bank account of the Plaintiffs.

The rent shall not be unpaid for at least one month (if unpaid, this Agreement shall be null and void).

The Defendant paid KRW 21,00,000 to E in accordance with the instant sub-lease contract, and operated the traditional tea house in the instant building.

On August 2012, the Plaintiff requested reduction of the rent of KRW 700,000 per month to the Plaintiffs due to the difficulty in operation due to the death of the partner. On the condition that the Plaintiffs were not in arrears, consent was given on August 13, 2012 and August 27, 2012, respectively.

However, from December 3, 2012, the defendant did not operate his business and did not pay rent thereafter.

On July 25, 2013, the plaintiffs proved that they sought the order of the building of this case on the grounds of overdue rent, etc. before the expiration of the lease term.