A. On January 15, 2014, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant as KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 420,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 420,000, and the lease term from March 8, 2014 to March 7, 2016, for 24 months.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

Since then, the instant lease contract was implicitly renewed and its contract term was extended, and the Defendant did not pay the rent from October (from September 8, 2016 to October 7, 2016) to the present day.

C. Article 4 of the instant lease agreement states that “A lessor may immediately terminate this contract when a lessee fails to pay more than two consecutive rents.”

On January 9, 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that he/she had no intent to maintain the instant lease agreement. On the other hand, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking the termination of the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the Defendant’s delay of rent, and the surrender of the instant real estate. On May 7, 2017, a duplicate of the instant complaint was served on the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the instant lawsuit is unlawful on the premise that the Plaintiff’s claim is a claim for surrender of a building pursuant to the notification of termination of a lease agreement under Articles 636 and 635(2)1 of the Civil Act, on the ground that it is not necessary to claim in advance as a lawsuit for future performance.

However, it is apparent by the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff is claiming the termination of the lease contract and the request for the delivery of real estate on the grounds of the delay of the defendant pursuant to Article 4 of the contract of this case and Article 640 of the Civil Code. Therefore, the above main defense of the defendant's safety is without merit without further review.

3. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above facts of recognition, this case is examined.