A. On January 6, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between the deceased F (hereinafter “the deceased”) with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with a deposit of KRW 65 million and the term of lease from February 5, 2018 to February 4, 2020 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. The Deceased died on May 22, 2019, and there was Defendant B, Defendant C, and D, his wife, as his inheritor. Defendant B filed an application for renunciation of inheritance with the Daejeon Family Court 2019-Ma1216, and the declaration of renunciation of inheritance was accepted on August 19, 2019. Defendant C and D filed an application for the renunciation of inheritance with the Daejeon Family Court 2019-Ma1186, and the declaration of qualified acceptance was accepted on August 19, 2019.

C. The Plaintiff notified the termination of the instant lease agreement to the instant complaint.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 2-1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The judgment of Defendant B on the claim against the above Defendant B renounced his inheritance, and the Plaintiff’s claim against the above Defendant was without merit.

B. According to the facts of recognition as to the claim against Defendant C and D, the instant lease agreement is deemed to have been lawfully terminated due to the Plaintiff’s declaration of intention to terminate the contract according to the instant complaint (a lessee may notify at any time the lessee of the termination of the contract, and such termination becomes effective three months after the lessor is notified of the termination of the contract (Article 6-2 of the Housing Lease Protection Act), and the fact that the instant lease agreement has been terminated may be apparent in fact). The Defendants are obligated to return the lease deposit to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff is obligated to order the Defendants to order the instant apartment.

However, there is no evidence that the plaintiff shown that he had ordered the apartment of this case to the defendants, and it is simultaneously performed.