1. The Defendant is from the Plaintiffs’ KRW 15 million to KRW 15 million on April 10, 2020, one story of real estate indicated in the attached Form from April 10, 202, and one story of 119.21 square meters.

1. On June 10, 2018, the Plaintiffs: (a) leased the 15,000 square meters of the 1119.21 square meters of the 1st floor among the real estate listed in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant on June 10, 2018; (b) the term of the lease was 24 months from June 10, 2018 to June 10, 2020; (c) the monthly rent was 80,000 won; and (d) the monthly rent was 10,000 won.

The defendant paid a deposit of KRW 15 million to the plaintiffs, and operated a restaurant in the building of this case. As of November 1, 2019, the defendant delayed to pay a monthly rent of 4 months.

Accordingly, the Plaintiffs terminated the lease agreement on the instant building on the ground of the delinquency in monthly rent, and filed the instant lawsuit seeking to deliver the instant building, and received a duplicate of the complaint on November 12, 2019 by the Defendant.

The defendant paid the overdue rent to the plaintiffs by June 30, 2020, but until that time, 1.6 million won is unpaid.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on the claim

A. According to the above facts, the instant complaint, which included the Defendant’s declaration of termination of the lease agreement on the grounds of delinquency in rent, was delivered to the Defendant on November 12, 2019, and the lease agreement on the instant building was lawfully terminated.

B. As to this, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the instant claim is unjust by paying the rent in arrears to the Plaintiffs by June 30, 2020.

The plaintiffs received the remainder of the rent of two months (from April 10, 2020 to June 9, 2020) from the rent in arrears until June 30, 2020, excluding the remaining amount of KRW 1.6 million from the rent in arrears. However, there is no evidence to support the fact that the plaintiffs did not dispute, but paid in full.

In addition, as seen earlier, since the lease contract on the building of this case already terminated lawfully by the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, the amount equivalent to the overdue rent was paid thereafter.

Even such circumstances alone are the case.