1. The Defendants deliver to each of the Plaintiffs the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiffs own 1/2 shares each of the three-story buildings on the ground of Yangcheon-gu Seoul E (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On December 30, 2015, the Plaintiffs leased to Defendant C a deposit deposit of 120,000,000 square meters (referring to the real estate indicated in the attached list; hereinafter the same shall apply) for the first floor among the instant buildings, KRW 6,00,000 for monthly rent of KRW 120,000 (including value-added tax, KRW 5,000 for each month), management expenses (a fixed amount, corridor and cleaning), KRW 50,000 for each month, and KRW 24 months from the lease date.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant lease contract”).

From February 5, 2015, Defendant C began to delay the payment of rent, etc. under the instant lease agreement from around February 5, 2015, and the Plaintiffs terminated the instant lease agreement by delivering a copy of the instant complaint on the grounds that Defendant C did not pay rent, etc. for at least two years.

Defendant D currently occupies and uses the instant real estate jointly with Defendant C.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 10, purport of whole pleading

2. Defendant D’s assertion argues that Defendant D had the right to use and benefit from the instant real estate after obtaining the consent of the Plaintiffs and obtaining the approval from Defendant C, and that there was a verbal agreement with the Plaintiffs that only electricity costs out of the management expenses and did not bear the remainder of the management expenses, and that the Plaintiffs suffered enormous damages by preventing the Plaintiffs from using the stairs toilets and water that were going to the second floor from June 2015 due to the management expenses, and that the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement remains, so it is not possible to deliver the instant real estate.

In this case, Defendant C sub-leaseed the instant real estate to Defendant D with the consent of the lessor, but the Plaintiffs also accepted the sub-lease contract between Defendant C and Defendant D.