A. On June 25, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the lease of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant leased object”) from June 28, 2016 to June 27, 2018, with the lease deposit of KRW 175,00,000 (hereinafter “the lease contract of this case”). After paying the above lease deposit to the Defendant, the Plaintiff received delivery of the leased object of this case from the Defendant around June 28, 2016.

B. After that, the instant lease agreement consists of implied renewals and continued, but the Defendant’s refusal to renew the contract has expired on June 27, 2020.

C. On July 14, 2020, the Plaintiff completed the registration of housing lease on the instant leased object on the ground of the order of lease registration No. 2020 Chicago5081 of this court.

On the other hand, the plaintiff occupies the leased object of this case until now.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1

2. Determination

A. 1) As seen earlier, the fact that the instant lease contract was terminated on June 27, 2020 upon the termination of the lease contract is identical to that of the above, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 175,000,000 upon the expiration of the lease term. 2) As to the defense of simultaneous performance that the Defendant cannot refund the said lease deposit to the Plaintiff until the transfer of the leased object. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the lease deposit upon the expiration of the lease term, barring special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da1545, Jul. 10, 198). Thus, the lessee’s obligation to deliver the leased object after the termination of the lease term and the duty to return the lease deposit to the lessor, barring any special circumstance, are in simultaneous performance relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da1545, Jul. 10, 1998).