A. On May 23, 2013, the Plaintiff leased 150 square meters among the real estate in Paragraph 1 of the Attached List owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant land”) as KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 700,000 (payment on June 25), and the lease term from June 1, 2013 to 24 months.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The Defendant did not pay monthly rent under the instant lease agreement to the Plaintiff from April 2014 to May 5, 201, and did not pay the remainder after the payment of KRW 600,000 to the Plaintiff around June 27, 2014, and KRW 200,000,000 around July.

C. The Plaintiff expressed in the instant complaint the intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the ground that the Defendant’s delay amount reaches two terms, and the duplicate of the instant complaint was served on the Defendant on July 10, 2014.

The Defendant currently occupies and uses the instant land and the real estate in Paragraph 2 of the attached Table owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Part on the claim for extradition of 150 square meters out of the land of this case

A. According to the facts of the determination on the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on July 10, 2014.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver to the plaintiff 150 square meters, which is the leased part under the instant lease contract among the land in this case.

B. The judgment of the defendant's assertion that since the defendant agreed to deduct the construction cost from the rent because the defendant did not comply with the condition that the defendant directly performs the above construction work even though the plaintiff promised to execute the floor concrete construction work on the land of this case, it is alleged that the rent of KRW 5,922,00 excluding the rent of KRW 3.6 million deducted from the rent of KRW 9,522,000,000 for the construction cost, the defendant's assertion that the rent of KRW 5,92,00,000, was paid beforehand, and that the defendant did not delay the rent. However, the number stated in the evidence