1. The defendant shall deliver real estate stated in the attached list from the plaintiff to the plaintiff at the same time, and at the same time, KRW 25,00,000 to the plaintiff.

On April 29, 2016, the Plaintiff leased the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “instant apartment”) from the Defendant on April 29, 2016 by setting the deposit amount of KRW 225,00,000 and the contract period from June 9, 2016 to June 8, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”) and paid the Defendant the deposit amount of KRW 225,00,000,000, there is no dispute between the parties.

According to the above facts, the instant lease agreement terminated on June 8, 2018, and the Defendant is obligated to return deposit KRW 225,000,000 to the Plaintiff according to the instant lease agreement.

However, as seen later, as seen earlier, the Defendant’s obligation to return the lease deposit is related to the Plaintiff’s obligation to deliver the apartment of this case simultaneously, and it cannot be said that the Defendant’s obligation to return the lease deposit was omitted due to the delay of performance. Therefore, the part

The defendant's defense shall be a defense of simultaneous performance that the plaintiff cannot respond to his/her claim until the apartment of this case is delivered by the plaintiff.

The fact that the plaintiff was delivered with the apartment of this case and resides in the apartment of this case until the date of closing argument of this case, and the fact that the lease contract of this case is terminated is not disputed between the parties. The plaintiff is obligated to deliver the apartment of this case to the defendant, and the obligation to return the deposit to the defendant is related to the plaintiff's duty to deliver the apartment of this case. Thus, the defendant'

Therefore, the defendant has a duty to return the lease deposit amount of KRW 225,00,00 to the plaintiff simultaneously with the delivery of the apartment of this case from the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.