1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is 42,480.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 16, 2018, the Plaintiff leased the attached building indicating real estate (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”) to the Defendant, with the lease deposit of KRW 50 million, KRW 800,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 from May 1, 2018 to May 1, 2020.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). Under the instant contract, the Defendant paid KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff by April 25, 2018, and around May 1, 2018, the instant building was transferred from the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff the monthly rent for four minutes by October 1, 2018, and paid the monthly rent for August 2018, but did not pay the following monthly rent to the Plaintiff.

C. Around March 29, 2019, the Plaintiff’s complaint of this case, which expressed the intent to terminate the instant contract on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in the payment of two or more rents, was served on the Defendant.

On June 12, 2019, the Plaintiff completed the extradition execution of the instant building to Seoul Eastern District Court C, based on the judgment of the first instance court that rendered a provisional execution.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The judgment below on the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim claims is examined by adding the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim claims. A.

According to the facts of the judgment on the Defendant’s duty to deliver the instant building, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on or around March 29, 2019 upon the Plaintiff’s declaration of termination on the grounds of the Defendant’s failure to pay rent for more than two years, and thus, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

B. The Defendant, who determined the Plaintiff’s duty to return the lease deposit, requested the Plaintiff to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff at the same time, and requested the Plaintiff to pay the lease deposit with the counterclaim.

As recognized earlier, the Defendant.