1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

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

B. From July 16, 2014, the above real estate.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs share 1/2 of each share of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On January 16, 2013, the Plaintiffs agreed to lease the instant real estate to the Defendant as KRW 40,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 3,080,000 (including value-added tax) and from January 16, 2013 to January 15, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. The Defendant did not pay the rent for three months after August 16, 2013. Accordingly, on November 19, 2013, the Plaintiffs notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant lease on the grounds that at least two rents are unpaid, and the said notification reached the Defendant around that time.

As of the date of the closing of the instant argument, the Defendant paid all rents by July 15, 2014, but did not pay rent after July 16, 2014.

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

2. According to the above facts of determination, since the instant lease contract was lawfully terminated on November 19, 2013, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiffs, and to pay the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 3,080,000 per month from July 16, 2014 to the completion date of delivery of the said real estate.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims of this case are with merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.