1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendants jointly deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. Defendant B shall be 1,100.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, as the owner of the real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”), entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B and the instant building (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”) around February 2017, with a deposit of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 5 million (excluding value-added tax), and the contract term from February 6, 2017 to February 6, 2019 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”).

B. Defendant B operated “D” on the instant building, and delayed the payment of rent from December 2017 to the Plaintiff’s account at once, and made a lump sum payment as shown in the attached Table, such as deposit of rent into the Plaintiff’s account, and continued the payment of rent thereafter.

C. Meanwhile, Defendant C occupies the instant building in the course of operating Defendant C with Defendant B.

On December 13, 2018, the Plaintiff notified Defendant B of the termination of the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the instant delayed payment of the rent of nine (9) years and the sublease without consent to E, and on December 14, 2018, the said notification was delivered to Defendant B.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry (including paper numbers) in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the instant lease contract was terminated on December 14, 2018, and the Defendants jointly delivered the instant building to the Plaintiff as co-owner of the instant building, and Defendant B did not return unjust enrichment for the possession and use of the instant building after April 6, 2019 to the Plaintiff. As such, the amount of unjust enrichment for the two-term period and the return of unjust enrichment for the possession and use of the instant building after June 6, 2019 is the return of unjust enrichment for the possession and use of the instant building, and is obligated to pay money at the rate of KRW 50,00 per month until the delivery date of the instant building.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and acceptable.