1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. Disposition of the judgment of the court of first instance; and

subsection. (3).

1. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and Eul evidence Nos. 2 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between the defendant on February 11, 2014 with a deposit deposit of 5,00,000,450,000, monthly rent of 28, and February 27, 2016 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”). The defendant delayed payment of 2 months or more from January 29, 2015 to June 3, 2015; the plaintiff expressed his/her intention to terminate the instant lease agreement by delivering a copy of the complaint of this case to the defendant on September 14, 2015; the defendant paid the plaintiff a deposit of 5,00,000,000, monthly rent of 450,000, monthly rent of 28, 2015 to May 15, 2015.

According to the above facts, since the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated due to the Defendant’s delinquency in rent around June 3, 2015, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated by the ratio of KRW 450,000 per month from August 29, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the said building.

2. The defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

However, the order of the court of first instance No. 1-B.

The paragraph shall be decided as per the disposition, since it was changed by the reduction of the claim in the party trial as referred to in paragraph (3).