1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

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

(b) As from November 1, 2015, KRW 1,200,00 and above.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 13, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 17 million, monthly rent as KRW 1880,000 (including value-added tax and groundwater charges), and the lease term as of January 1, 2017, with regard to the real estate listed in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. While the Defendant occupied and used the instant real estate on June 2015, the Defendant delayed the payment of KRW 7.3 million out of the rent up to June 2015. Accordingly, the Plaintiff expressed the Defendant’s intent to terminate the instant lease through the instant complaint on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent. A duplicate of the instant complaint was served on the Defendant on July 17, 2015.

C. Since then, the Defendant: (a) KRW 3 million on July 16, 2015, as part of the rent in arrears to the Plaintiff; and (b) the same year.

9. On July 1, 200, 200,000 won, 2 million won at the end of September of the same year, and 4.4 million won in the middle of October of the same year, were paid as monthly rent up to September of 2015, and thereafter, on November 2015, 680,000 won was paid as part of the monthly rent on October 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-5's entries, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above findings of determination, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on July 17, 2015, based on the Plaintiff’s expression of intention to terminate the lease on at least two occasions, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and to pay to the Plaintiff unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 1.2 million in arrears on October 2015 (= KRW 1.80,000) and the rent of KRW 1.2 million (=680,000), which is the day following the date of delivery of the instant real estate, from November 1, 2015 to the day after the delivery of the instant real estate is completed.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.