1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the annex;

B. As from December 7, 2014, the delivery of the said real estate.

Facts of recognition

On October 6, 2011, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant real estate after full payment of the sale price in the instant court’s voluntary auction procedure with respect to the real estate in the attached Form, which was owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

On October 6, 2011, the Plaintiff leased the instant real estate in KRW 800,000 to the Defendant without a deposit for lease, but had reduced the monthly rent in KRW 500,000 from December 7, 201, following the two months.

The overdue management fee by December 6, 2014 is KRW 2,034,080, the overdue gas cost is KRW 74,880,000, and the rent paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff up to the above time is KRW 5,500,000, and the unpaid rent up to that time is KRW 14,100,000 (= KRW 19,600,000 - KRW 5,500,000).

On the other hand, on September 30, 2013, the Defendant granted approval of KRW 720,000 to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including a provisional number), and the purport of the entire pleadings, but the above fact-finding is established. The defendant did not pay the difference of real estate. Thus, the lease contract of this case was terminated on December 23, 2014, on which the copy of the complaint of this case stating the declaration of intent to terminate the lease contract of this case was delivered to the defendant.

As to the amount of unpaid rents, it is reasonable to see that the Defendant approved 720,000 won, which was approved on behalf of the Plaintiff, under the name of the rent for the instant real estate. Therefore, the unpaid rents are 13,380,000 won (=14,100,000 won - 720,000 won).

The plaintiff argues that KRW 720,000, which the defendant instead approved, is the name of repayment for other loans, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the existence of other loans and the appropriation for such loans.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiff either paid rent in cash or paid rent in lieu of payment of rent, etc., or made the defendant's credit card use by the plaintiff.

However, the defendant submitted the evidence Nos. 1 to 3.