1. The Plaintiff, the Defendant A, the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, and the Defendant B, the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff entered into each of the following lease agreements with the Defendants with respect to the rental housing stated in the separate sheet between the Defendants.

Buildings listed in the attached Table 2, 28,51,000 B of March 1, 2013 or February 28, 2015, or November 302, 2016 or November 316, 200, 40,610 C of June 1, 2014 or May 31, 2013, 145, 830 D of November 1, 2015 or October 25, 2016, 0708,70707, listed in the attached Table 4 of the building listed in the attached Table 2.

B. From September 2015 to February 2016, Defendant B defaulted on rent and management expenses of KRW 375,130; Defendant C entered into a renewed contract from October 2015 to February 2016; Defendant D paid rent and management expenses of KRW 1,296,490; Defendant D paid rent and management expenses of KRW 978,280 from October 2015 to February 2016; Defendant A failed to pay rent and management expenses of KRW 695,090 from September 201 to February 2016; and Defendant A paid rent and management expenses of KRW 695,090 from February 28, 2015 to February 2016; Defendant A concluded the renewed contract, despite the fact that the instant lease contract was terminated, until now.

C. Article 10(1)4 of the General Terms of Contracts concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendants provides that “if the rent is in arrears for at least three consecutive months,” and Article 10(1)9 of the same Act provides that “if the lessee violates the obligations under the standard contract, the lessee shall be subject to the termination of the lease contract.”

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

2. As to the facts found in the above determination, the defendants did not delay the rent and management expenses for more than three consecutive months, and it is evident that the complaint of this case was served on the defendants to the effect that the lease contract of this case is terminated on the grounds thereof. Thus, each of the lease agreements entered into between the plaintiff and the defendants was terminated lawfully.

Therefore, the Defendants respectively possess real estate to the Plaintiff.