1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

(b) From November 1, 2014 to A.

subsection (b).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 24, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the terms that the instant building was leased to the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amounting to KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 2.5 million, and the period from February 8, 2014 to February 7, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

The terms and conditions of the above contract provide that "the defendant cannot claim for the premium to the plaintiff for the facilities installed by the defendant as required, and deliver it to the plaintiff upon the expiration of the contract after restoring it to its original state."

B. The Defendant, while taking over and taking profits from the instant building, did not pay for the rent on September 2014 and October 2014. Accordingly, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease contract by delivering a copy of the complaint of this case on the grounds that the Defendant’s delinquency in paying rent for more than two months was attributable.

C. The Defendant, after the filing of the instant lawsuit, remitted a total of KRW 5.5 million to the Plaintiff on November 12, 2014 and October 2014, which was the date of the instant lawsuit, but the subsequent rent was not paid until April 3, 2015, which was the date of the closing of argument.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry or video of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, since the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated by the Plaintiff’s declaration of intention to terminate the contract due to the delay in payment of rent for more than two years, the Defendant delivered the instant lease object to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff received the rent from the Defendant to October 31, 2014, as seen earlier, the fact that the Plaintiff received the rent from the Defendant is identical to the foregoing. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff unjust enrichment per rent calculated by the ratio of KRW 2750,000 per month from November 1, 2014, the following day, to the delivery date of the instant building.

Although the defendant asserts to the effect that it is null and void since the portion of September 2014 and the portion of October 2014 were paid to it, the defendant has already been in arrears with two or more vehicles.