2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

3.

A. On March 6, 2017, the Plaintiff, via his agent, concluded a lease agreement with D on a deposit deposit amounting to KRW 10 million and KRW 50,000 per month for the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and handed over the instant real estate to D.

B. After that, D sublets the instant real estate to E without the Plaintiff’s consent, and currently, the Defendants occupied the instant real estate, which appears to be a family member of E.

C. On May 8, 2017, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on the ground of D’s aforementioned illegal transfer, through an agent.

On the other hand, according to the instant lease contract, where a lessee subleases it without the lessor’s consent, etc., becomes a ground for termination of the lease contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, and 6 evidence (including branch numbers for additional evidence), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff as an illegal occupant, unless there are special circumstances.

Therefore, the defendants' defense to the effect that they cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim until the plaintiff or D is refunded the lease deposit. Thus, the tenant cannot set up against the lessor's claim for the return of the leased deposit with the lessee's claim for the return of the leased deposit. Thus, the defendants' simultaneous performance defense based on the lease deposit claim against D is without merit without further review.

3. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is accepted.