1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendants deliver attached real estate indicated in the attached Form;

B. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable for payment on January 10, 2013.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (1) On October 24, 2005, the Plaintiff is a real estate indicated in attached Form B (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to Defendant B.

(2) Around June 9, 2006, the Plaintiff leased part of the instant real estate (one unit on North Korea) KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 600,000,000 as well as the lease period of October 24, 2007. (2) Around June 9, 2006, the Plaintiff additionally leased the remainder (one unit on the south side) of the instant real estate, excluding the above lease portion, to Defendant B, by setting the deposit amount of KRW 13 million, monthly rent of KRW 450,00,000, and the lease period of KRW 450,000 as of June 9, 2008.

B. After that, around January 2012, the Plaintiff and Defendant B extended the lease period of the entire real estate of this case to May 24, 2012, and the lease deposit was to be the same as the previous one, and the monthly rent was to be KRW 1.6 million.

C. Defendant C and D are married couple, and they run business in the name of E from the instant real estate since before 2013.

[Ground] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap1 to 7 evidence (including provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, since the lease agreement on the instant real estate has already been terminated due to the expiration of the lease term, Defendant B, the lessee, and Defendant C, the direct occupant of the instant real estate, are obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff.

In addition, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay to the Plaintiff money calculated by the ratio of KRW 1.6 million, which is the monthly rent of the instant real estate, from January 20, 2013 to the delivery date of the instant real estate, as unjust enrichment.

B. Defendant C and D’s assertion 1) The above Defendants asserted to the effect that the monthly tax of the instant real estate is KRW 1.6 million, not KRW 1.5 million, and the unpaid monthly tax is KRW 2.1 million, the remainder of the monthly tax has already been paid. The assertion that there is a letter of commitment setting the monthly tax of the instant real estate as KRW 1.6 million (in light of evidence A1-2, the monthly tax of the real estate is KRW 1.5 million cannot be accepted.

In addition, the unpaid amount has already been paid in 2008.