1. The defendant shall deliver to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation real estate stated in the attached Form.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The defendant on January 14, 2009 (hereinafter "the real estate of this case") shall be the real estate in the attached Form from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (hereinafter "the real estate of this case").

(1) The term of the lease contract under which the term of the lease contract was fixed from November 26, 2009 to November 30, 201 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) is set forth as KRW 8,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 71,000, and the term of the lease (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

(2) On July 6, 2010, B borrowed KRW 5,600,00 from the Plaintiff, and as security, the Defendant transferred the right to return the lease deposit stated in the preceding paragraph to the Plaintiff, and notified the Korea Land and Housing Corporation of the transfer of the said right.

3) As of February 11, 2016, the Defendant did not pay a seven-month difference to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation as of February 11, 2016. (4) The Plaintiff, through the delivery of the instant complaint, expressed its intention to terminate the instant lease agreement on the ground of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including branch numbers for those with a branch number), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the instant lease agreement is deemed terminated on February 18, 2016, which the complaint of this case delivered to the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As the Defendant’s assertion and the Korea Land and Housing Corporation agreed to conclude a lease agreement on June 2, 2016, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.

B. After the lessor was notified of the transfer of the claim for return of the deposit, the effect of the agreement cannot be affected by the transferee of the deposit, even if the lessor and the lessee have made an explicit or implied agreement on the renewal of the lease contract or extension of the contract term.

(See Supreme Court Decision 88Meu4253, 4260 delivered on April 25, 1989). Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s termination.