1. The defendant's delivery of the C-ground building from the plaintiff in both weeks at the same time, and 25,000,000 won to the plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff, on February 13, 2013, leased a building specified in the Disposition No. 1 (hereinafter “instant building”) from the Defendant from the Defendant as of February 13, 2013 by setting lease deposit amounting to KRW 25 million, from February 13, 2013 to February 12, 2015, and around that time, paid KRW 25 million to the Defendant is without any dispute between the parties, or recognized in accordance with the purport of the written evidence No. 1 and all pleadings.

According to the above facts, the above lease contract was terminated on February 12, 2015.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to refund the lease deposit amount of KRW 25 million to the plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

2. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s simultaneous performance defense, the Defendant could not respond to the Plaintiff’s request until the delivery of the instant building, and the fact that the lease contract on the instant building between the Defendant and the Defendant was terminated on February 12, 2015 is as seen earlier. Since there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff occupied the instant building until the date of closing argument, the Plaintiff, a lessee, is obligated to deliver the instant building, which is the leased object, to the Defendant, who is the lessor, and the obligation to return the lease deposit to the Defendant is related to the Plaintiff’s simultaneous performance.

Therefore, the defendant's above defense is justified.

Ultimately, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 25 million simultaneously with the delivery of the instant building from the Plaintiff.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.