Defendant B received KRW 9,887,550 from the Plaintiff, and at the same time, the real estate indicated in the attached Table is provided to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 25, 199, Defendant B leased the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) at the time between D and E at the time.

B. While Defendant B resided in the instant real estate, F acquired the ownership of the instant real estate on March 20, 2003, and thereafter, on October 1, 2003, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant real estate and succeeded to the lessor’s status in sequence.

C. On May 2004, the Plaintiff and Defendant B concluded a lease contract with a fixed term of KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 80,000,000, and two years for lease (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with respect to the instant real estate, and thereafter, the lease contract was renewed at KRW 100,000 per month in the course of several renewals of the instant lease contract.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B

A. According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 4 and 6 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff did not timely pay the monthly rent to Defendant B, and the Plaintiff exceeded KRW 4 million on January 18, 2017, and notified Defendant B of the termination of the instant lease agreement on the ground of the foregoing delay. On February 8, 2017, it is recognized that the Plaintiff notified Defendant B of the fact that “the instant real estate was handed over to Defendant B by February 9, 2017.”

According to the above facts, the instant lease contract was terminated by the Plaintiff’s declaration of intention to terminate the contract on the ground of the following delay of Defendant B at the latest around February 9, 2017.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff was paid a monthly rent from Defendant B to February 10, 2017 with unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent or rent.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, Defendant B transferred the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and it was deemed unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from February 11, 2017 to the completion date of the delivery of the instant real estate.