1. The defendant against the plaintiffs

A. Of the buildings listed in the separate sheet, each point of the separate sheet Nos. 2, 3, 8, 9, and 2 shall be in sequence.

1. The quoted part

A. The description of the claim is as shown in the annexed sheet of claim.

(b) Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts.

2. The Plaintiffs, from June 23, 2016 to June 23, 2016, seek unjust enrichment or damages equivalent to the rent from the date of completion of delivery of the store specified in Paragraph (a) of Disposition 1 (hereinafter “instant store”).

According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiffs received monthly rent from the defendant in June 2015 (this constitutes rent from June 14, 2015 to July 13, 2015). Thus, the defendant ultimately did not pay rent to the plaintiffs from July 14, 2015.

In addition, the Plaintiffs separately claimed KRW 2,60,000, which is the sum of the rent, unjust enrichment, and damages equivalent to 13 months, against the Defendant (i.e., the amount of KRW 2,00,000 from the lease deposit to the end of 600,000). The amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, or the amount of rent, from July 14, 2015 to August 13, 2016, which is the 13 months after the Defendant did not pay the rent, shall be included in the above amount of KRW 2,60,000.

Ultimately, the unjust enrichment or damages equivalent to the rent that the plaintiffs can seek against the defendant are limited to unjust enrichment or damages from August 14, 2016 if the plaintiffs excluded the above 2,600,000 won.

However, since the plaintiffs seek unjust enrichment or damages equivalent to the rent from June 23, 2016, the plaintiffs' claims cannot be accepted within the above limit.

3. The plaintiffs' claims are justified within the scope of the above recognition, and they accept them, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.