1. From March 30, 2016 to the attached Form among the instant lawsuit

1. Attached Form among the second floors of the building to be entered;

2. Drawings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion is attached to the Defendant on June 29, 2013.

1. Attached Form among the second floors of the building to be entered;

2. In the order of the specifications No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 1 of the same drawings on the ship (a) section No. 120.1 square meters and the same drawings No. 1, 12, 13, 14, 15, 2, and 1 of the same drawings, the lease deposit amount of KRW 31.76 square meters in the ship (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant store”) was leased to the lease deposit of KRW 90,000,000,000 won in the monthly rent of KRW 3,00,000 (value-added tax separate), and the lessor concluded that the said lease contract may be terminated at the time of arrears twice a month.

However, the Defendant did not pay the monthly rent more than twice. Since the above lease contract is terminated, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is obligated to pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent by the date of the completion of delivery.

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the purport of the written evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s lease agreement in its possession may be terminated at will at least twice a monthly rent (Article 4). In the event of arrears at least twice a monthly rent (Article 4 of the Special Agreement). In the event of arrears, the lessor may arbitrarily handle the lease agreement at least twice a monthly rent (Article 4 of the Special Agreement), and the Defendant did not temporarily delay at least twice a monthly rent, but the Defendant continued to transfer the lease agreement to the Plaintiff.

(2) However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers), the witness C’s testimony and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, ① Article 4 of the special agreement on the lease agreement of the store of this case kept by the defendant and the broker C, is written in the form of “in arrears on a monthly basis three occasions” in the manner of stating three above by attaching modified tapes attached thereto; ② C’s dialogue with the defendant, and the investigation agency’s “in the event of the payment of the balance, the defendant’s correction is proposed at this court, the dialogue with the defendant, and the investigation agency’s explicit consent.”