1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. On November 11, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with respect to the real estate stated in the purport of the claim (hereinafter “instant real estate”) (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) that is owned by the Plaintiff from November 26, 2016 to November 25, 2017, the lease deposit amount of KRW 30,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 30,000,000, and the monthly rent of KRW 26,000 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). On the other hand, the Plaintiff agreed that the said lease agreement may be terminated immediately if the Defendant fails to pay the rent more than twice.

B. On or after February 27, 2017, the Defendant did not pay a monthly rent under the instant lease agreement, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant lease agreement was terminated on or around September 28, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, as the Defendant had delayed the payment of monthly rent on more than two occasions, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease contract, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent or the monthly rent from February 27, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the said real estate.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant knew of the fact that the instant real estate was wholesale store, but in fact, it was difficult to conduct the business due to the retail store, and the sales of the instant real estate did not occur after the lease while paying the premium of KRW 35 million, and it was offered for another person to take over the instant real estate again, but it did not use the instant real estate for the purpose of the lease agreement for a more than one year, and thus, it could respond to the Plaintiff’s claim, as it did not use the instant real estate for a more than one year, such as the monthly rent was too large.