A. The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction and improvement project association which has obtained authorization for the establishment of the Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Mapo District as a project implementation district under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, and the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government grants authorization for the housing reconstruction project implemented by the Plaintiff

6. 9. The notice was made.

B. The Defendant leased and possessed the real estate listed in the attached list in the said project implementation district at KRW 10,00,000, and KRW 900,000 per month from D, the owner of the property located in the said project implementation district.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts, pursuant to Articles 48-2(1) and 49(6) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, the defendant is obligated to deliver buildings listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.

B. On the other hand, the defendant alleged that it is impossible to accept the plaintiff's claim since he did not receive a refund of the lease deposit. Thus, the defendant can seek a return of KRW 10,000,000 against the plaintiff, who is the business operator. The defendant's duty to deliver the deposit and the plaintiff's duty to return the deposit are related to the simultaneous performance. Thus, the defendant'

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is partly accepted within the scope of the above recognition.