A. The Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on December 31, 2009 with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 30,000,000 and the lease deposit of KRW 24 months with respect to the leased object (hereinafter “the lease agreement of this case”) with the Defendant, taking into account the following facts: (a) there is no dispute over the part of the claim for the delivery of a building; (b) the evidence Nos. 1 through 22, and Nos. 1 through 8; and (c) the Plaintiff had resided in the leased object after the expiration of the lease period; (c) the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to move the leased object from the end of December 2, 2015 to the Plaintiff from the date of the lease; and (d) the Defendant did not request the Plaintiff to remove the leased object of this case with respect to the removal of waste of this case from the new leased object of this case, but did not request the Plaintiff and the Defendant to remove waste from the new leased object of this case within 197,000.

On the other hand, there is no evidence to prove that assembly poppy, straws, and several straws, which the Plaintiff demanded removal, are owned by the Defendant, and the Defendant was not obligated to remove each of the above goods to the Plaintiff, but did not deliver the key of the leased object to the Plaintiff, so the Defendant fulfilled the duty to deliver the leased object.

It is difficult to see it.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver Pyeongtaek-si 102 to the plaintiff, and the defendant also claims the return of deposit for lease and simultaneous performance. Since the lease contract of this case is terminated, the plaintiff is the defendant.