1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendants deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. Defendant B shall be KRW 1,000,000.

1. Facts constituting the premise for determination

A. On April 4, 2014, the Plaintiff, as the owner of the real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”), leased the said building to Defendant B with the lease deposit of KRW 10 million, the lease deposit of KRW 20 million from April 23, 2014 to April 22, 2016, respectively. At the time, the lessee entered into a contract on behalf of the Defendant B as the mother of the said Defendant.

Afterward, the defendants moved into the above building and possess it until now.

B. Meanwhile, according to Article 2(2)1 of the contract at the time, the lessee is required to pay the monthly rent in advance on the 23th day of each month. According to Article 4 of the same contract, the lessor may terminate the said contract in a case where the amount in arrears of the lessee falls short of the two terms.

C. After the conclusion of the foregoing contract, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the contract to the Defendants several times on the grounds that the Plaintiff was in arrears, and finally sent a content-certified mail to the same effect on January 22, 2015, and the said mail reached the Defendants on January 23, 2015.

(hereinafter “Notification of Termination of the Contract”). The current status of rent paid by the Defendant on the part of the Defendant until then is as follows:

Date of April 22, 2014, May 23, 2014, the period of 5.20,000 won, KRW 5.5 million,5 million, KRW 5,000,000,000 won, KRW 5.5 million,000 won, KRW 5.5 million,000 won, KRW 5,000,000 won, KRW 5,000,00 won, KRW 5,000,00 won, KRW 5,000,00 won, KRW 5,000,00 won, KRW 5,000,00 won, KRW 5,50,00 won, KRW 5,000,00 won, KRW 5,000, KRW 5,000, KRW 5,000, KRW 5,00

4. The facts that there is no dispute between May 23 to June 22, 23 to June 23, 22, 23 to June 22, 23 to July 23, 22, 23 to August 23, 22, 23 to August 2, 22, 23 to September 23 to October 22, 22, 23 to October 23 to November 22, 22, 201, the grounds for recognition were stated as Gap, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 5 (including provisional numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion on the cause of the claim was that the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated, since the overdue rent reaches two times at the time the termination of the instant contract was notified.

Nevertheless, the defendants are the defendants.