1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part demanding the payment of KRW 1,048,320 from May 1, 2020 shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant.

Facts of recognition

On June 23, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant as to each building listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) with the deposit amount of KRW 60,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 5,200,000 (including value-added tax) and the lease agreement between July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2018.

Around that time, the Defendant occupied and used the instant building by being transferred.

On October 31, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant changed the deposit of the above lease to KRW 50,000,000, KRW 4,800,000 per tea (including value-added tax) and the lease term from November 1, 2016 to October 31, 2017.

On October 31, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant changed the deposit of the above lease to KRW 40,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 4,200,000 (including value-added tax), and the lease term from November 1, 2017 to October 31, 2019.

On February 28, 2018, the Plaintiff and the Defendant changed the deposit of the above lease to KRW 60,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 3,200,000 (including value-added tax), and the lease period from March 1, 2018 to February 28, 2020.

In each of the above contracts, the plaintiff agreed to terminate the lease contract if the defendant fails to pay the rent more than three times.

The defendant notified the delay in the payment of rent and the termination thereof to the plaintiff from November 2016 to February 2020, paid 104,347,50 won out of the rent to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff did not pay the rent thereafter.

The plaintiff notified the termination of the lease agreement by the lawsuit of this case, and the copy of the complaint of this case reached the defendant on April 13, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] According to the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including serial documentary evidence; hereinafter the same shall apply), the delivery of a building and the claim for unjust enrichment equivalent to rent or rent, the lease contract between the plaintiff and the defendant was lawfully terminated by the plaintiff's declaration of intent to terminate the contract.

Therefore, it is true.