A. On June 20, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant to preferentially pay KRW 50,000,000 (including value-added tax) for each of the lands listed in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant land”) from June 21, 2017 to June 20, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The lease agreement was concluded between the Defendant and the Defendant to preferentially pay KRW 15,00,000 (including value-added tax).

B. Around that time, the Defendant had received the instant land, constructed a public relations center on the ground, and used it until now, but did not pay rent to the Plaintiff.

C. The unpaid rent accrued from June 21, 2017 to October 20, 2017 is KRW 66,00,000 (= KRW 16,500,000 x 4 months).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including each number for a case with a serial number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination ex officio (Article 1)

A. The instant lawsuit contains the part seeking payment of money calculated at the rate of KRW 16,50,00 per month from June 21, 2018, which was after the expiration of the instant lease term, to June 21, 2018.

B. However, a lawsuit claiming performance in the future may require a prior claim (Article 251 of the Civil Procedure Act). In addition, a judgment ordering performance in the future may not be rendered where the cause of nonperformance can be determined at the time of the closing of pleadings, as well as where the cause of nonperformance remains until the time when the period of fulfillment of the obligation arrives in the future.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Da37517 delivered on June 14, 2002, etc.). C.

Of the instant lawsuits, the above part is not deemed to need to be claimed in advance, but it is unclear that the period of liability is the “date of completion of delivery” of the instant land, and thus, cannot be allowed as a future performance lawsuit.

The reasons are as follows.